The Word That Cannot Be Spoken (in white company)

Since the candidacy of now US president, Barack Obama, there has been a reinvigorated US discussion on race. This conversation happens in all kinds of ways. Today’s New York Times has op-ed columnist Shankar Vedantam trying on the newest wig, Colorism. Vedantam cites numerous examples of how skin color prejudice. He references the prison system, hiring practices, electoral campaigns, Harry Reid’s recent exposure of having committed a rhetorical faux pas. He cites the health consequences of Mexican-American women poisoned using skin lighteners. He calls all of this colorism placing the focus on how some humans are punished for having dark skin.

Shankar Vedantam can’t use the terms white supremacy or white skin privilege although they are clearly the subjects of his article. Vedantam, a Niemen fellow at Harvard University likely knows what white supremacy and white skin privilege are. He just can’t write them. In the end, that says more to me than any of the facts or pieces of evidence in his article. We are left trying to unravel this maze of oppression and suffering inflicted on some and unearned privileges and rewards gifted to others without the linguistic benefit of being able to say what we are actually talking about: the historical advantage of humans of European descent. Gained militarily and sustained with centuries of military, economic, biological and psychological warfare.

Discussing the effects and results of centuries of racial oppression in terms that obscure the realities of the problem is not a step forward. Terms like colorism and multiculturalism operate mostly in the service of confusing the discussion and any efforts to move from discussion to action. This false conversation on race serves as a distraction and obfuscation while allowing whites and lighter-skinned elites of various ethnicity who are accepted as honorary whites, to feel as if they are working in service of progressive politics when they are really just defending white supremacy and skin privilege at a moment when rapidly shifting demographics and economic disaster has the future of the West’s global dominance in serious question.

It isn’t that no one is directly indicting the systems of white supremacy and white skin privilege. It just can’t be done within liberal institutions like the New York Times and Harvard University, white company.

Vedantam and other social and pundits present quite a challenge. To dismantle centuries long reign of white supremacy and white skin privilege without mentioning them. A plan built to fail.

Kasim Did It

Kasim Reed is no progressive. No one thinks that. But he did just barely win the election in one of the most racist cities in the United States. And when I say just barely I mean it. In the December 1st runoff election against white candidate Mary Norwood from Buckhead, Reed came out ahead by less than one percentage point.

What will this mean politically? The white elites of Cousins Properties and the white men down in the Loudermilk Bldg still control Atlanta. Reed, like mayor Shirley Franklin and before her Bill Campbell, will have to have to answer to these rich whites. But in keeping Norwood, and the white frenzy that made her viable, out, Black Atlanta on some fronts managed to dodge one of the bullets of white supremacy. Again, being that Reed is no progressive, there isn’t much positives to look for in his candidacy. This was more about what we avoided. Still there are lessons here.

First thing. Every activist or politically minded person in Atlanta is aware that white progressives and Black progressives don’t really work together. The coalition aspect of work is what is instead emphasized. It has been almost 40 years since a white candidate had a real shot at being mayor of Atlanta. When Norwood, a self-proclaimed political independent, appeared as a candidate, white Republicans within the city limits raced to her side. They got there just a split second ahead of progressive Obama-whites who also sprinted over to support her. In a bipartisan psychic cry they all yelled, ‘Finally, a white mayor!’.

So the first and most important lesson from this election is that the racial coalition between white and Black progressive Atlanta, isn’t. It’s a fraud. This election will stand historically as the evidence.

Second lesson. On August 17th Kasim Reed polled at 8%. The Wall Street Journal reported on the polling. Less than three and a half months later he is the new mayor. He mounted an astonishing comeback. No, not really. Lesson number two is that Atlanta’s political polls/surveys are fake.

The final lesson from this election shouldn’t be a lesson at all, really. And that is that the people of Atlanta are a ways away from having the strength, the people power, to make anything happen from the grassroots. The reasons for this are many but this election is the evidence. As in the presidential election in 2008, the people are left to vote for a corporate candidate that appears or sounds minutely better than the other corporate candidate. Boooo…not good.

Oh one more thing that was obvious in this election but that we certainly should know by now. The blogosphere is really the whitosphere. To read websites and blogs one would have easily assumed that Norwood had the mayor’s office locked. Of course it was just white bloggers keyboarding to themselves and to their white readers mostly. December 1st delivered to them all a reality check. Even their most eloquent (or nasty) blog post ain’t got shit on reality.

Peace love and hairgrease.

Army Using Fake Fort Hood Threat For SOA Security

This morning it was exclusively reported by the Army Times that a threat letter was found yesterday at the Fort Benning, GA army base. The letter vaguely says that if the commanding general doesn’t call off all charges there will be a re-enactment of Fort Hood. The treat level of the base has been increased according to the Army Times, accompanied by a serious increase in police presence. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution also reported on the threat, attempting to tie it to General Petraeus’ trip to the base for Officer Candidate School Operation.

Neither the Army Times or the AJC mention that the appearance of this note warning of a Fort Hood repeat occurred on the same day as the School of the Americas Watch protest at Fort Benning, GA, the largest annual protest of a US military establishment in the country.

This isn’t an error in journalism. The note is a fake. The reporting is a fake. Fort Hood is a massive US Army base. You would think, in the wake of the Fort Hood shootings that this might be national news. It isn’t. And because this isn’t being reported widely at CNN and other national outlets, the usual ratcheting up of public fear doesn’t seem to be the play here.

The SOAW protest is the target, which last year brought 20,000 people to the bases gates. Look for something unbecoming to perhaps happen this year. Looking out my hotel window I see flashing lights whizzing by and cops pulling people off of Columbus streets left and right.

The timing of this news story is such that it won’t discourage protestors from attending the event. It came out to late. Maybe the fake note was meant for something else.

Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing

Because the website is down and I believe this needs to be read, I am reposting this from the website of Imam Anwar’s blog about the actions of Nidal Hassan. It is a powerful statement that shouldn’t be ignored.

Nidal Hassan is a hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people. This is a contradiction that many Muslims brush aside and just pretend that it doesn’t exist. Any decent Muslim cannot live, understanding properly his duties towards his Creator and his fellow Muslims, and yet serve as a US soldier. The US is leading the war against terrorism which in reality is a war against Islam. Its army is directly invading two Muslim countries and indirectly occupying the rest through its stooges.
Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the US army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.
The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former. The Muslim organizations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal’s operation.
The fact that fighting against the US army is an Islamic duty today cannot be disputed. No scholar with a grain of Islamic knowledge can defy the clear cut proofs that Muslims today have the right -rather the duty- to fight against American tyranny. Nidal has killed soldiers who were about to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in order to kill Muslims. The American Muslims who condemned his actions have committed treason against the Muslim Ummah and have fallen into hypocrisy.
Allah(swt) says: Give tidings to the hypocrites that there is for them a painful punishment –
Those who take disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. Do they seek with them honor [through power]? But indeed, honor belongs to Allah entirely. (al-Nisa 136-137)
The inconsistency of being a Muslim today and living in America and the West in general reveals the wisdom behind the opinions that call for migration from the West. It is becoming more and more difficult to hold on to Islam in an environment that is becoming more hostile towards Muslims.
May Allah grant our brother Nidal patience, perseverance and steadfastness and we ask Allah to accept from him his great heroic act. Ameen

For the cached version on google, here.

CNBC to America: Meb Keflezighi Not White Enuf!

The new millenium white supremacist look

It’s a stunning headline: American Wins Men’s NYC Marathon For First Time Since ’82. Unfortunately, it’s not as good as it sounds. Meb Keflezighi, who won yesterday in New York, is technically American by virtue of him becoming a citizen in 1998, but the fact that he’s not American-born takes away from the magnitude of the achievement the headline implies.

Sigh…it’s a difficult thing. How to be gracious and ego-stroking enough so that white readers will hang around long enough to hear what needs to be said balanced against being able to tell the truth.

Columnist for CNBC, Darren Rovell made an interesting observation about the hoopla over the first American winner of the NY Marathon in 27 years: he’s not white enough.

Like other liberal or conservative white-thinking folks when it comes to race, he didn’t say, literally, what he meant. He graced us with proper racial coding, definitely understood by anyone with two brain cells but enough to guarantee his continued employment at a major news network in Amerikkka.

Mary Norwood’s Race Politics

Mary Norwood is a white candidate for mayor of Atlanta, a city that elected the last white mayor in 1970, almost forty years ago. The one thing the election is not short on is pretense. We field negros are supposed to be pretending that race has nothing to do with any of this. With anything, in fact. Barack Obama is president of a white majority Amurka. Norwood can be mayor a Black majority ATL. See? No difference.

The New York Times reports today that Atlanta may see its first white mayor in more than a generation in Mary Norwood. The article is accompanied by many empty-headed slogans, from Black mouths of course, about it meaning nothing for a politician’s race to be Black. This is a slick move that distracts from the point of their article which is discussing a white mayor. Not meaning as much, or anything at all as some would say, that a mayor be Black is a very different thing than having a white mayor. Inductive reasoning perhaps is not required to become a Times writer. Or maybe the ability to manipulate faulty induction to build an upside down argument IS a prerequisite.

Mary Norwood comes from Buckhead the whitest and richest white neighborhood in Atlanta. The political pundits who get their salaries paid by the advertising dollars flowing out of Buckhead won’t talk about her background much. And if you go looking for details and background info over at her Wiki page you’ll be left wanting. These are coincidences.

Anyone familiar with US politics beyond the superficial coding understands the role played by race and that there is a communication grid that operates just beneath the surface of all political talk. As a good auto mechanic would say, Norwood’s recent ad is hitting on all cylinders. As racist as this country and city are it is not your father’s racism and Norwood’s team understands it can’t win the mayor’s office yelling nigger. The operative phrases are crime, accountability and public safety. That’s nigger, 2009 style.

• Crime is out of control = Black field negros are out of control. Of course with the implication that she will, finally, do some controlling.
• City Hall is run poorly = Black politicians are corrupt. Duh. Of course they are. And who do they work for? The white men that graduated Emory with Norwood.
• Everyone should be able to feel safe = White folks and house negros, it’s okay for you to come back into the city. Things are in good hands. Again. Kathryn Johnston types fiend for yourselves.

To be sure, all of the major candidates for mayor of Atlanta are business lackeys. And I don’t advocate for any of them but I do understand the particular threat posed by Mary Norwood, 1) she will give new confidence to white racism and white supremacy and 2) the increased difficulty field negros will have in protecting our civil liberties under a white mayor that does point 1.

Even Atlanta’s white progressives (whatever that means to them) are showing their true colors. The very first time a white mayor is viable in four decades, they are getting behind that campaign. Which doesn’t do much besides illustrate clearly to others what we already knew. When it comes down to it a white that calls himself liberal isn’t much different than a white that calls himself conservative. When it really comes down to it. He or she might not call me a nigger even behind closed doors but she’ll vote with the people who do.

If things keep moving in the direction we’re told they’re moving in (Norwood is supposedly the frontrunner) Black ATL will get to understand this truism up close and personal. And whites will get to turn the ATL back into Atlanta.

The White Antiwar Left Fades Into Quagmire

Retired Col Ann Wright was in Atlanta October 6th speaking on Afghanistan at First Iconium Baptist Church. She outlined what has happened thus far in Afghanistan and gave her views on what the future should hold. The corporate news venue of record in Atlanta, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, ignored the event altogether. Atlanta Progressive News reported that the retired colonel argued for withdrawal. That’s not what I heard .

To be clear, everyone except out and out fascists understands that one day the US Armed Forces will leave Afghanistan. So when we say we argue for withdrawal, without a timetable it is an ‘argument’ without meaning. That is what the colonel offered. And that is what the white antiwar left as a whole is increasingly offering. Alternet, a news organization whose self-proclaimed mission is to inspire action and advocacy for human rights and social justice, is promoting, via one of its senior editors, Joshua Holland, a more sophisticated version of what Col Ann Wright described-the quagmire.

A quagmire is a situation from which it is difficult to extricate oneself. That, according to people like Josh Holland, Ann Wright, Medea Benjamin (CodePINK founder) and increasing numbers of the white antiwar left are calling the US occupation of Afghanistan. But take a second and think about what a quagmire is in contrast to the former antiwar demand of immediate withdrawal.

Immediate withdrawal, unlike withdrawal, is not confusing or ambiguous and shrugs off any kind of leeching quagmire analysis. Immediate withdrawal is just that. And quagmire can have nothing to do with immediate withdrawal. But immediate withdrawal increasingly, is not what the white antiwar left is calling for. And as they become more in line with Obama’s liberal/conservative consensus, they are getting attaboys from people like Ralph Lopez, who argue for prolonged backdoor Afghan occupation-we must save Afghan women from the Taliban. Lopez who runs a website called Jobs For Afghans and is a popular blogger at the website that claims to exist to get Democrats elected, DailyKos, writes about how the white peace movement has ‘grows up’. Specifically, grows up means CodePink founder Medea Benjamin is no longer calling for immediate withdrawal but something more sensible that acknowledges our responsibility to the women of Afghanistan under siege by the Taliban. Has anyone forgot about Iraq and how the US Armed Thugs are raping and murdering imprisoned women and children????? Apparently. Lopez is claiming that we need to create jobs in Afghanistan!! Haha, what does he think this is, really?? He refers to the position of immediate withdrawal as anti-imperialist flap.

Lopez and those who agree with him are stooges for Obama and before him, Bush. Lopez may or may not understand this but it doesn’t matter. The position speaks for itself. The corporations making billions off the war and the US planners that need the regional control all want to prolong the military occupation of the region. And this Ralph Lopez-Ann Wright-Medea Benjamin wing of the white antiwar movement has grown up and want to stay as well.

Back to the quagmire. The notion of a quagmire says, it implies rather, that one is caught between a rock and a hard place. Between completing a mission on the one hand and abandoning the mission and leaving on the other. Since when did the white antiwar movement believe the US Armed Thugs actually had a valid mission to complete in Afghanistan? It really has matured, I guess.

And the timing of this maturity couldn’t be better. Obama, this man of peace, this feminist, and also mature, is about to increase the troop levels of US Armed Thugs in Afghanistan. This will allow us to defeat the Taliban/Al Qaeda, kill Bin Laden and save the women. Then we can leave. Morally. Responsibly. Right?

Rush Limbaugh’s NFL Gambit; What’s Really Going On?

There has been a lot of ink, most of it male and liberal and white, about Rush Limbaugh’s failed attempt at becoming a National Football League franchise owner. Though I agree with many of the commentaries and critiques I think they are missing the point in all of this. Like this piece by Dave Zirin breaking down what he calls Limbaugh’s ‘defeat’ at the hands of Limbaugh’s “compadres on the right”. True, but I smell a rat. While I don’t agree with Limbaugh and the point of view he advocates, it doesn’t sound as if he is an unintelligent man. Despicable? Yes. But he’s not stupid. He had to know this NFL franchise ownership thing wouldn’t go. He didn’t actually lose any money in this scheme and his ratings will go up at least temporarily from it for sure. So what is really going on here?

Rush Limbaugh knew this deal would fall through, as it has. And this scheme fits right in perfectly with the way the ruling class handles the right wing populace of the United States. Constant victimization by liberals/nonwhites/feminists, you get the picture. Limbaugh knew this would be shot down and then he would turn around and… Well, he doesn’t have to actually say anything much. The right wing impulse to search for an angle of victimization runs deep enough that the script already runs inside their heads. This kind of stirring up of the right wing base is what the endless so-called fight to end abortion is all about, the ten commandments in public buildings and things like that. Fights that will last forever and keep alive the idea of being oppressed and victimized by various groups even as the right wing consolidates more and more national and international power. Forever a victim.

I see this as a particularly dangerous moment. Perhaps not but it does seem to signal a shift in the scale of gimmicks and tactics employed by the right wing in stirring up their people. Sports is a very large stage for sociopolitical messaging. And the NFL is the largest of the Big 3 pro sports messaging vehicles. I guess we will see how this continues to unfold but it doesn’t add up to me that this was a misstep by Limbaugh, that he didn’t predict the pushback and striking down of this effort. These things were certainties.

White supremacy, always the prime political mover in this country, has been on the upswing in the United States since the candidacy of Barack Hussein Obama gained momentum. It continues to arc upwards and this Limbaugh stunt just appears to be another episode in what may turn out to be a particularly sordid, and maybe violent, chapter in this country’s white supremacist history.

Does Mary Norwood Care About Black People?

MARTA, Atlanta’s public transportation system providing about 400,000 rider a day is in the deepest financial crisis in its 40 year history. On Saturday August 15, 2009 service cuts went into effect reflecting MARTA’s deepening fiscal crisis and on Thursday October 1, 2009 a fare increase went into effect. The service cuts and fare increase have affected hundreds of thousands of Atlantans but if you were watching the mayoral debate that aired yesterday, October 13, 2009 you would not have known it.

Do you know how much MARTA costs? I know how much it costs. I live in Atlanta and use the service everyday. Let’s assume you, like me, know how much a bus ride costs in Atlanta. Mary Norwood does not know how much a MARTA bus fare costs.

Doesn't ride MARTA or read about it apparently

There is a difference between me and you and Mary Norwood not knowing this bit of information. A big one. There is an election coming up soon here in Atlanta. In 20 days, in fact. And according to polls, if that election were today, of us three, the one of us that doesn’t know how much it costs for transit-dependent Atlantans to catch a bus would be the mayor of Atlanta. MARTA stands for Metro Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority. It also known as ‘moving Africans rapidly through Atlanta’ due to the highly skewed racial demographic of the ridership.

What is going on inside Mary Norwood’s campaign for mayor? What is going on inside Mary Norwood’s head? How is it possible that mayoral candidate could be ignorant about such an important piece of policy at such a critical time for MARTA and for its cash-strapped, mostly Black ridership?

I view this foot in mouth incident as a sneak-peek into what a Norwood administration might be like for people like myself who rely on something like MARTA. She doesn’t care and doesn’t seem to see it as a problem not caring. Every other candidate attempted to answer the question of the cost of a MARTA fare. Norwood simply said she didn’t know, making it appear that she doesn’t even care that she doesn’t know. It also appears that she and/or her campaign don’t think it matters much that she doesn’t know. All of these things are worrisome to me and they should be worrisome for Norwood. That they don’t seem to be is even more worrisome for me.

Many people have expressed concern about this majority Black city, with its sordid history and present-day white racism problems, having a white mayor. This clear and present expression of either dullness, disdain or disinterest does nothing to allay the concern and much to validate it. Shame on you, Mary.

Obama Shuts Down Pittsburgh For His Rich Friends

If China were banning train service into one of its cities in preparation for the G20 in order to limit public speech and dissent what would the US press say? The same racist and xenophobic garbage they always come up with in relation to China. Of course nothing when Obama does it? Obamamaniacs will say Obama didn’t do it, Amtrak did it. Or the mayor of Pittsburgh. Or the governor or whatever. Orders like this come from the top. Perhaps as ‘suggestions’.

http://www.examiner.com/a-2168305~Amtrak_suspending_Pittsburgh_service_for_G_20.html

Whitney’s Failed Comeback

Drag em through the mud. Predictably, the white dominated press presents the worst possible spin on Whitney Houston’s so-called comeback. I liked Whitney back in the late 80s and 90s. I’ve got no particular love for her lavish lifestyle and the drug use and associated drama. But I have no special love for anyone that engages in that lifestyle. However, the white press seems to miss opportunities to drag white drug celebs through the mud in the same way. It’s probably just my paranoia though….

<object width=”420″ height=”356″><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.comcast.net/ve/1.0/1236938260/420/356/”></param><param name=”wmode” value=”transparent”></param><param name=”allowScriptAccess” value=”always”></param><param name=”allowfullscreen” value=”true”></param><embed src=”http://www.comcast.net/ve/1.0/1236938260/420/356/” allowScriptAccess=”always” allowfullscreen=”true” width=”420″ height=”356″ type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” wmode=”transparent” pluginspage=”http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer”></embed></object>

Republican Healthcare Disruptions Working

CNN and the entire network of corporate news outfits are all talking about the Republican effort to disrupt the so-called healthcare town hall meetings. There is a lot not understood about this effort.

First off, this isn’t about Obama’s plan. This is all about single payer healthcare and finding ways to keep it off the table. The first strategy was to simply ignore those in favor of single payer and in left opposition to Obama’public option plan. But the single payer activists made enough noise and managed to get enough support in the House of Representatives that the ignorning tactic wasn’t going to work. Now we are looking at the second act of a plan designed to keep single payer off the menu.

The US population want’s healthcare reform. When polled, one discovers, unsurprisingly, that we also want single payer healthcare reform. Therefore the choice has to be removed from the table where it has been presented and hidden from the view of those who don’t yet know about it. To achieve this, we are seeing a tactic we should get used to: loud racist attack from the right wing, followed by tenacious defensive response from the liberals. All accompanied by around the clock TV/radio/internet coverage. All working to keep the attention of viewers/listeners/readers focused on the ‘main event’ and keeping activists feeling that there duty is to battle racist conservatives. This is the first time we’ve seen this regarding a major policy initiative since Obama was elected but not the first time this strategy has been deployed. The first instance was the 2008 presidential campaign.

Last year when Obama was backing off all the promises and positions that allowed him to gather speed and momentum as a contender he began getting significant pressure from McKinney voters and former supporters of Dennis Kucinich. When this pressure, like the single payer pressure, became too much to simply ignore, out came the racist canards from first the Clintons then the McCain campaign. The intention was the same in both cases-to decrease support for left pressure and redirect it towards defending against racist attack. This is what we are seeing now with the Republican townhall meeting disruptions CNN is so eager to cover everyday.

White liberals elected Obama because he was better than the Republican alternative. But the selected Obama over Clinton because of their racial insecurities. It is these insecurities that will be exploited to push back against left opposition for the next three and a half years of this administration. If not longer.

The US must find a way to counter this strategy or it will see nothing come of healthcare reform, the Employee Free Choice Act or any legislation we hope to affect progressively.

Kennesaw State University and Corra Harris

Corra Harris was a white supremacist. Read her 1899 letter to the editor of the Independent defending the lynching of Sam Hose and, if nothing else, that is clear. But it isn’t 1899. It’s 2009 and we all know that the Earth rotates around the sun and viruses are real (we can see them under microscopes). But still in 2009 whites don’t think, still don’t think, that the white terrorism and attempted genocide of Black southerners is a big deal. Those who do think what happened was and still is a big deal are called ‘racists’, ‘politically correct’ and other slanders in what should be termed the new 21st century vernacular of white supremacists. This is the terrain upon which the battle over the memory of Corra Harris is being waged.

The story goes that this started when Kennesaw State University was approached and offered this land in 2008 by DeKalb County businessman Jodie Hill. But that story doesn’t really make much sense. Remember, 2008 was the year of the real estate and mortgage industry meltdown. Thus starting with the offer by Hill to KSU is prolly more than a little bit dishonest. It’s difficult to know the real deal because KSU isn’t fessin up on all it knows and what it knows is likely just half the story. There are serious questions that haven’t been answered. And some haven’t even been asked.

• Hill is attempting to liquidate this asset now-why?
• Hill is being credited for a three million dollar donation to KSU. How much could Hill have gotten in the private sector for this undeveloped 56 acres in the middle of the subprime meltdown? Three million? Haha.
• Were all professional and familial conflicts of interest between KSU and Hill disclosed before the deal was done?
• Does the contract between Hill and KSU stipulate that the Cora Harris landmarks must be maintained by KSU?
• Is it ethical for an institution serving Black and white students to maintain a memorial for a Jim Crow white supremacist?

These are a few questions that need to have a public forum. And not the public forum administered, faciliated and controlled by the KSU president but a forum with the KSU administration, faculty, staff, students as well as community-at-large present and controlled democratically. A democratic forum would be controlled and faciliated democratically, meaning by students, staff and community members primarily, with administration and faculty playing a minor role in line with their representation.

This hasn’t happened and that is part of the reason key questions haven’t been asked or answered. None of this even begins to deal with the moral and political problems raised by this situation. Problems and issues like this need to be dealt with in order for this land deal to be understood properly but it’s also larger than this piece of land. Whites tend to refer to problems in this realm as ‘racial’ problems. But this doesn’t accurately describe what we’re dealing with. The problem is white supremacy. When we don’t understand or acknowledge that our chances of moving forward narrow considerably.

As we prepare for the opening of the 09-10 academic year, we shouldn’t hope for genuine participatory dialog with all the aforementioned constituencies. It can happen but unfortunately hope won’t do it. We have to organize it. Then and only then will we see real questions asked, real answers provided and finally some light shed on actual machinations of this racist land deal.

Mousavi Probably Didn’t Win

I’m in support of fair elections in Iran. That’s pretty easy to say, I know.

But I’m not particularly for Mousavi or Ahmadinejad.  And I’m slow to believe anonymous articles coming out of Iran claiming the election to be fraudulent. My reasoning here i s that there are lots of international interests in Ahmadinejad being removed from power and anonymous internet traffic denouncing the election results fits right in with what one would expect from US intelligence.

All that said, Ahmadinejad is an authoritarian who isn’t in support of things the majority of Iranians want. Such as the right to vote for the Supreme Leader instead of the holder of that post being dictated to the population. Mousavi doesn’t support this either however.

Another thing that bothers me is the lack of recognition in the Western press of the internal dynamics of Iran. This election is being written about as the people vs the government. This is how US politics is often written about as well and that version of events is often a smokescreen for ruling class fights.

• What are the dynamics of the Iranian ruling class?
• What are their interests in this election?

The NYTimes hasn’t made those questions a central point in their analysis and that is worrisome. Instead they have written more about the use of Twitter by wealthy Iranian college students. This kind of perspective skewing yellow journalism raises flags for me.

And finally, I have read that polls indicate only a third of Iranians have internet access. I would assume that this is the upper class layers of the population. It is known that Ahmadinejad has done significant wealth redistribution. This is never popular in countries with significant class divides. Therefore, to see lots of anti-Ahmadinejad information coming out of Iran on the net is predictable and because of the digital divide that exists there, not a good litmus for judging what is actually happening on the ground. Unfortunately, most folks outside Iran depend on the net for information on the situation. And in this case, as in many cases, the net opinions will have a very high class bias and the class realities of this political situation must be honestly taken into account and not simply dismissed as most seem to be doing. Here in the US, liberal political discussion is dominated by the middle and upper-middle class that has easy and frequent internet access. Those liberals are far more conservative than those with less wealth and less access to the discussion. If you were to only watch the US political discussion by way of the internet you would have a very biased and inaccurate view of the political situation here. You would likely not understand the political views of Black, Latin or poor Americans generally because of the way the digital divide acts as an economic censor to so many millions of political voices. As a Black person in the US I understand this dynamic quite intimately and am very wary of the political narrative we are being fed in regards to Iran. I don’t feel that the net saavy student movement in Iran represents the masses of poor people at all. Because it is reported that they are young and using Twitter, the story appeals to naive whites here who like to fetishize nonwhite people who accept the use of technology similar to white populations in the US but it really doesn’t make sense that these Iranians would be the group representative of the popular base in Iran. They are largely college students and business elements with far more resources than it appears most of the population. My point in all of this is that we need to be far more discriminating and discerning about information coming out of Iran and use our common sense (which apparently is all too uncommon in the West).

Misplaced Left Wing Blame For Right Wing Murder

Rob Kall over at opednews.com has a theory that it’s not only Hannity, Savage, Beck and Limbaugh-the right wing-but the left as well, that is fueling the right wing killing spree. He theorizes that it is the sharp media characterizations of the ‘other side’ that are inflaming millions of Americans, many of them mentally ill, who have the potential to kill. Any serious political formation first and foremost should be willing to criticize itself. So hat tip to Rob Kall for engaging in any kind of self criticism. Unfortunately his audience is correct but he aims at the wrong thing.

Any one paying attention has long understood the right wing’s role in fear/hatemongering. Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, O’Reilly, Boortz and many others have had listenerships in the collective tens of millions for many years now. So when white, right wingers get their guns and kill perhaps you can place blame at the doorstep of the right wing media that foments fear and hate every night. The interesting aspect Kall brings is the blaming of the left wing of US politics in this dynamic.

Every day the right wing bends the ear of millions of mainstream US citizens to its message. If there is one mainstream left (NOT LIBERAL) commentary outlet that reaches even a 100,000 listeners I haven’t heard of it. So to compare the actions of the left to those of right wing commentary doesn’t add up.

Rob Kall starts off his piece saying that it may piss off some of his white liberal/left readership. And I’m sure he’s right. Some will be upset to hear that their daily pasttime of heading over to DailyKos, Democratic Underground or his site, OpedNews to rip Sean Hannity a new one isn’t necessarily the most helpful thing for them to be doing. But there is another more important critique that I thought Kall was going to make that he didn’t touch that would is more appropriate and would surely upset the opednews.com faithful. When I read the link to Kall’s piece, ‘Wingnut Murder Spree or Are WE The Problem’, the ‘WE’ in his title fooled me into thinking he was going to address the much more salient issue of left and liberal whites complicity in the racial hatred expressed more overtly by the right wing. The left preaches tolerance and diversity but more often than not lives racial segregation and division. Unlike their right wing counterparts, left and liberal whites are more willing to live in relative proximity to non-whites. Sociologists call this gentrification. But this tolerance doesn’t translate into significant interracial living. Black cashiers at Publix, Target and Trader Joes doesn’t count. Left and left-leaning whites disagree SHARPLY with the rhetoric of the right wing. To be clear on this, liberal, progressive and left whites disagree very strongly with the right wing when it comes to hate speech, theories and violent rhetoric aimed at nonwhites. However, the theoretical and rhetorical disagreements are lost in the translation into real life. Consequently, as a good example, the bright line of right wing hate, interracial co-mingling, marriage, sex and children seems to be shared by many white liberals and leftists. It is in this way that I think the white left, the WE Rob Kall refers to, actually does bear some responsibility. Attorney General Eric Holder kicked this message in his Black History to the Department of Justice where he called [white] America a ‘nation of cowards’ when it comes to dealing with white racism. He wasn’t just talking to the right wing. In fact, he logically had to be talking more to the white liberals and leftists than white conservatives.

Conservatives in 2009 are still a long ways away from being able to deal with the historical reality of the United States of America, no less actually engage in productive white anti-racism work and living. The liberal and left white population therefore is who he and others with Holder’s critique refer to. And therefore when the racial cauldron boils over some and racial murder is the result it is white liberals and leftists that must bear a portion of the blame for the antiracism work and living they agree needs to happen but that they continue to decline to actually do. I wish Rob Kall would talk about this. But he never does.

None of the white left talks seriously about this issue. They feed themselves, and us nonwhite folk on the left, the same regurged tracts about diversity and tolerance and multiculturalism and good intentions etc. But those same liberal and left intellectuals lead lives that are almost as segregated and racially isolated as many of their right wing counterparts they excoriate on paper, in books, and  on blogs and websites. Rob Kall and others essentially talk to themselves about the racial situation and to each other, the logic of morally upright racial rhetoric, divorced from the actions of their daily liberal lives, adds up.

To the rest of us, its just blather. Dangerous blather.

Tabloidism or Preps For A Political Coup?

Left-wing Paraguayan president Fernando Lugo has fathered a child outside of marriage. OPn May 10th, Mother’s Day in the United States, this is a front page story according the newspaper of record. Some folk will say this is stupid of them to even report on it. Some will say Lugo is turd or is corrupt for having done this. But we all know the New York Times and the ruling class it represents doesn’t really care about this kind of thing. They do it all the time. It’s political. Just like the Spitzer story that happened right before the biggest political-financial scandal exploded in the state they removed him from, this Lugo story is political. So what is being planned? Chavez style political coup de etat? Hopefully Paraguay will be supported by Brazil, Venezuela and its other allies through what may be coming.

Here’s the pic from the front page story of the Times

Stress Tests Are Complete Joke; Market Optimism ‘Delusional’

It is most important to note that during this news interview the Bloomberg news anchor doesn’t challenge any of the facts presented. Only the analysts perspective. Sorta like what the Obamamaniacs respond with when he is criticized.

“Don’t be so cynical!”

Analysts Kirby Daley makes Bloomberg News unhappy by explaining why they and every analyst they have brought on has been lying through their teeth. A careful watching of the video reveals just how fundamentally corrupt the financial system and its paid guns, the corporate news anchors and analysts are. Daley is no leftist. He is advising his clients to get in and make a little quick money during what he calls this ‘manufactured’ market rise but then to GET OUT because it is not at all real.

The Bloomberg analysts, Bernard “Bernie” Lo tries to remain composed but is visibly uncomfortable with Daley’s presentation.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

For such an explosive video, it is is not widely posted.

Ideology vs Pragmatism vs you and me: The US Supreme Court

With the pending retirement of US Supreme Court Associate Justice David Souter, a predictable media mini-circus (swine flu is the current circus) is opening up over it. Names are floated alongsides particular interests or so-called identity groups that would benefit or ‘like to see’ a certain candidate nominated. Care seems to be being taken to ensure it reads like every other very typical political script. A Latina is by definition progressive and will ‘satisfy’ Latin people, feminists and racial progressives generally. Specifically, Sonia Sotomayor is the Latina being suggested  as a likely Obama nominee. I will assume that since her name is appearing in major media that the Obama administration has suggested she is a frontrunner (it might be true or they might be trying to appear progressive according to the script).

Ethnic media outlet New America Media (NAM) is pushing the idea positively apparently for the simple reason that Sotomayor is of Puerto Rican descent, something we all should find highly dubious ever since that poor Black kid from Pin Point, Georgia arrived on the court almost 20 years ago and has voted with the right wing ever since. NAM supports the nomination writing that

Naming a Hispanic would soothe frayed nerves among Latino leaders

and approvingly of Sotomayor,

She is not an ideologue but has a pragmatic streak

I don’t think the NAM perspective is an isolated one. That pragmatism can be divorced from ideology is a curious notion. A pragmatic or practical way of looking at things within a highly ideological and extreme political context means that you aren’t interested in rocking the boat but going along to get along. I try to imagine a pragmatist in Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s Germany or Benito Mussolini’s Italy. What does pragmatism mean in a country that leads the largest global wealth divide in human history? What does pragmatism look like in a country waging two imperialist hot wars and dozens of cold and covert wars? What is pragmatism in a country where children hide in the woods while their mothers and fathers are kidnapped off their jobs and ‘detained’? How to be pragmatic in a judicial system that imprisons five times as many Black men proportionally than did South Africa under apartheid? What does pragmatism look like on a court that last year ruled that it was okay for evidence obtained from an illegal arrest to be used against me? What is this non-ideological pragmatism? And is it what people of color need today? No less, should we consider it a victory if that is what we end up with on the Supreme Court? I can hardly think so. If Sotomayor or any pragmatic person of color ends up on the US Supreme Court, should Brown, Black, Red, and Yellow people celebrate?

Obama and the forces he represents (and those that still find themselves supporting him and those forces) would like to frame ideology as something to be avoided, as an obstacle to getting things done in Washington. In reality, extreme neoliberal ideology is behind everything that happens in DC and throughout most of this country. All the while claiming to be everything but ideological.

A Brown/Black/Red/Yellow, non-ideologue is the perfect tool of confusion for Obama and the billionaires whose interests he represents. Obama, of course is a perfect example of this kind of tool. As he gives millionaires and billionaires billions and trillions of dollars he is simultaneously juxtaposed next to Martin Luther King and Malcolm X on t-shirts. If that’s not confusion, nothing is.

To be clear, Sonia Sotomayor isn’t personally the problem. It’s just that under imperialism, to rise as high as she or Obama or anyone like them, you have to be pragmatic. You have to go along with the empire to get along with the empire. You have to be pragmatic.

We don’t need an appointee from Obama. We need a movement opposing the policies of Obama who watches while autoworkers get kicked out of their jobs and unto the streets of Detroit but trips over himself rushing to back trillions of dollars in loans to white guys that are already rich. We need a movement of revolutionary reality supplanting the hypnotic support of Barack Obama. We need it yesterday.

So no to Sotomayor, no to all appointees from the rich who make our lives miserable to begin with. They are the ones killing us, don’t count on them saving us.

Atlantans Standing Together?

ATAC, Atlantans Together Against Crime is as founder Kyle Keyser says, ‘becoming a force to be reckoned with’. The group is holding rallys according to WSBtv, in neighborhoods around Atlanta to protest violent crime in the city. The group is receiving fabulous press. I have not yet read or heard a negative word (or negative framing) about them from big tv or print media. This is odd considering the press tends to disparage or at least present in a disparaging frame grassroots, people-oriented action unless it is conservative (the tea parties). I will be going to the next ATAC rally to see for myself what is going on and by whom.

White Supremacist Tea Parties and such…

On Yahoo.com’s front page. No-the main story on Yahoo’s front page at the moment of this posting (8:22 am est April 16, 09) is about Barack Obama’s tax return and how much the rage it is on the web. White supremacy is, by the second now, going more and more mainstream.

I hadn’t posted on this blog for a while because there were other things going on, like getting laid off from the job and the supposedly eminent halt of public transit service here in Atlanta. There’s always lots going on politically if you care to get involved with something in Atlanta. With so much dirt being done and such a proportionally tiny response, there is always something for a troublemaker to get her/his hands into if so inclined. Recently the opposite has been happening.

Yesterday a crowd larger than any antiwar protest that has ever assembled on the streets of Atlanta, parked on the steps of the state capitol and surrounding streets to express its collective fury at the Obama administration’s class warfare on them and its rage at the theft of their tax dollars. It was a white power rally in drag. It was calling itself a tea party.

About ten thousand white folks came downtown to protest the federal deficit, their tax rate, ‘illegal’ humans, an immigrant (and thus illegal) president and out of control government spending. You’d have been hard-pressed to find anyone in this crowd interested in halting Barack Obama’s military budget, bigger than any ever put forward by either President Bush. This, so-called movement, like all white political activity related to the budget, is protest of monies going to non-whites, however those monies might reach non-white destinations. Isn’t odd how there was no tea party ‘movement’ under Bush with his ballooning budgets and deficits. There was the usual white noise whining on the AM dial but nothing materialized. With a Black man in the White House, all bets are off. But back to the tax return.

For years, there was the scandal of then Vice President, Dick Cheney, having been the CEO of one of Halliburton, a company that received billions in contracts after his election. The question arose as to how much was he making from Halliburton stock and other corporations he had ties to before assuming the office of VP.Was there ever a media-fueled effort to stoke public interest in his earnings?

Did mainstream media, the likes of Yahoo! ever link directly to his tax return as they have today with Obama? Of course not.

What will these hordes of whites the media ignores the racial aspect of in calling it a popular movement, do next? More importantly, what are progressive forces going to do?

The age of Obama becomes more interesting (and scary) everyday.