Saturday, April 03, 2010
The Opposite Of Plantation Negro Circa 1919
The Plantation conditioned Negros to revere Rosa Parks, MLK & Brown v Board ... while disparaging Marcus Mosiah Garvey Jr., ... for a reason.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
102 comments:
"The white man is too intellegent to let someone else come in and gain control of the economy of his community. But you will let anyone come in and take control of your the economy of your community, control the housing, control the jobs, control the business... . No, you're out of your mind".
Malcolm X
The same words have been spoken for years but only a few listen and act upon them.
The Opposite Of A Plantation Negro Circa 2010
Even though I don't believe in your "Plantation Negro" thesis, if I did Alan Keyes would be a person I'd say is so ensconced in the "plantation", that I wouldn't be surprised if he slept in shackles and chains in a shack in the back of his home for comfort.
"Even though I don't believe in your "Plantation Negro" thesis, if I did Alan Keyes would be a person I'd say is so ensconced in the "plantation", that I wouldn't be surprised if he slept in shackles and chains in a shack in the back of his home for comfort."
LOL!!! That's classic material, DMG.
Soulijah Story
But...the ships were rusted out and unfit to sail. Regardless of intention, his game was not tight.
But...those ships were over priced for starters and Garvey tried to fix 'em up. The SS Yarmouth made trips between the US and Caribbean for a few years. Some of the ships were sabotaged by Hoover's secret agents and corruption killed his business.
Regardless of this, the +-90year legacy of Garvey and the Black Star Line is tight.
Ces
Forget Alan Keyes. Think Cynthia McKinney or Glen Ford as the ideological descendants of Garvey.
Black independence is a great philosophical idea, but he was a bad businessman.
If we can't separate out the good and the bad from our heroes, then we don't learn anything.
Even though I don't believe in your "Plantation Negro" thesis, if I did Alan Keyes would be a person I'd say is so ensconced in the "plantation", that I wouldn't be surprised if he slept in shackles and chains in a shack in the back of his home for comfort.-DMG
He is no different from 50cent. Rap and Basketball isn't the only means to "get rich or die trying." The previous generation possess just as much potential to give in to record lable demands or party demands, just as anyone else. You can slang dope or slang slogans, whatever sells.
Yeah, every dog has his day. And although I agree with Allan Keyes on some points, other points I think he's crazy. In particular he is a complete Zionist and warmongerer. So although he tells the truth in one arena he certainly supports lies in another arena. Everyone has their limitations.
To be honest, you'd be better off highlighting his daughter. She is a vegan, complete pacifist and activist. She is totally anti abortion and totally anti animal violence, she is also an out lesbian. But she is involved in many causes that you actually champion here and she does not have the smug self righteous attitude that Keyes possesses.
Like I said, every dog has his day; he spoke truth in one instance. But don't slip he's supported the 'plantation' more often than not, as DMG aptly noted.
M. Rigmaiden,
Maybe you didn't notice, but it is Mr. Keyes' job to protect his daughter and not the other way around. This duty is a self-evident acknowledgement of evil and its existence.
If evil exists and warmongers like Keyes did not, where would we be?
Do you not see the correlation between a warmongerer father and a daughter that lives in passivity, but retains the message of protecting the weaker of us?
Warmongerers bring down civilizations. Without them, we'd be colonizing other planets by now.
The real plantation negroes are those who have eyes, but they can’t see that the enemies of Afrikan liberation made no distinction between Marcus Garvey, Malcolm X and Martin King, in their efforts to neutralize them. The things the most virulent white supremacist of the 20th Century, J. Edgar Hoover, said about Garvey in the 1920s were repeated almost verbatim about King in the 1960s.
[He stands head and shoulders over all other Negro leaders put together when it comes to influencing great masses of Negroes. We must mark him now . . . as the most dangerous Negro of the future in this Nation from the standpoint of Communism the Negro and national security.] FBI Memorandum on MLK 1963
[From December 1963 until his death in 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr. was the target of an intensive campaign by the Federal Bureau of Investigation to "neutralize" him as an effective civil rights leader. In the words of the man in charge of the FBI's "war" against Dr. King:
“No holds were barred. We have used [similar] techniques against Soviet agents. [The same methods were] brought home against any organization against which we were targeted. We did not differentiate. This is a rough, tough business.”
The FBI collected information about Dr. King's plans and activities through an extensive surveillance program, employing nearly every intelligence-gathering technique at the Bureau's disposal. Wiretaps, which were initially approved by Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, were maintained on Dr. King's home telephone from October 1963 until mid-1965; the SCLC headquarter's telephones were covered by wiretaps for an even longer period. Phones in the homes and offices of some of Dr. King's close advisers were also wiretapped. The FBI has acknowledged 16 occasions on which microphones were hidden in Dr. King's hotel and motel rooms in an "attempt" to obtain information about the "private activities of King and his advisers" for use to "completely discredit" them.] US Senate Select Committee 1976
Although his soul is surely burning in Hell, its amazing how the demonic spirit of J. Edgar Hoover still affects our thinking.
Hoover did some very evil things MB. Even deeper, I've read somewhere that he was an octoroon and tried to overcompensate. If this is true, that makes his behavior even more egregious in my eyes...
If you're a communist trying to bring communism to America then you are an enemy of America. To act shocked and astounded that such a COMMMUNIST person was then serveilled, marginalized and reputed by Americans is beyond absurd. It suggests either a fundamental anti-Americanism (what is black liberation in America mean anyway) or a complete intellectual and historical autonomy.
M. Rigmaiden,
What do you call those that advocate war against evil if not warmongers?
And have any warmongers ever saved women and children?
"It suggests either a fundamental anti-Americanism (what is black liberation in America mean anyway) or a complete intellectual and historical autonomy." TD
Mmm...Thor, do you care to tell us whatchu think Black Liberation means in America? From an anti-historical autonomy perspective, of course.
Konwomyn,
All liberal movements are at root a destruction of a PARTICULAR relationship. The black liberationist movement (in America) is at root about the destruction of the relationship between the historic collective "American black" and the historic America.
And because this destruction of relations OCCURS at the individual level then black liberation became the destruction of the black slave/white supremacist relationship.
And even though this relationship has been thoroughly destroyed, its operative existence still remains an inexplicably entrenched belief in the collective black psyche.
Yet, white supremacy still exists and so black liberation must acknowledge that which was always inherent in the mission of black liberation, namely, seperation of black from whites and America.
"Yet, white supremacy still exists and so black liberation must acknowledge that which was always inherent in the mission of black liberation, namely, seperation of black from whites and America."TD
No TD. The purpose of Black liberation was to have the choice to live our lives as equals and with dignity. MLK was a champion of liberation theology but did not advocate separatism. You are conflating a lot of stuff that you know nothing about.
Liberation means to be free of oppression. If you listened to anything in the video about Garvey, you'd see that before he got a bit eccentric he had a large following worldwide.
Why? Not because Blacks wanted to be separated from Whites, but because Blacks wanted to have something; to create; to have opportunities never before available to us.
You have a myopic view of things if all you can glean from talk of liberation is separatism. This is why I rarely have the patience to even engage you.
“the mission of black liberation, namely, seperation of black from whites and America.”
That’s the typical response from someone caught in the middle of a mental ménage a trois with J. Edgar Hoover and Clyde Tolson
“What White People Fear”
http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/america-the-remix/what-white-people-fear
“The History Of White People”
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124700316
Sis. Rigmaiden it is a fact that J. Edgar Hoover had Afrikan ancestry and there is little doubt that the fear of that discovery contributed to his venom.
http://www.inlandempireservices.com/currentnews.htm
Of course, that wasn’t his only fear.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N3Vg5l-ITU
From Marcus Garvey to the Black Panther Party, Hoover was clearly one of the most powerful and destructive forces Afrikan Americans have ever had to deal with.
pissed
self hating
racist
homosexual
= bad news
obviously
=death 2 the world
Again, I'm wondering what schools y'all went to.
Garvey was just as popular in my "black" schools as Rosa.
A serious businessman who had a national organization. Why wouldn't he be popular in "black" schools.
Some of y'all got shafted by your educations.
Sis. Rigmaiden it is a fact that J. Edgar Hoover had Afrikan ancestry and there is little doubt that the fear of that discovery contributed to his venom.
1) who doesn't have "Afrikan" ancestry?
2) why would that "discovery" make anyone fearful or venomous?
These memes are built on a shaky premise.
"Garvey was just as popular in my "black" schools as Rosa.
Some of y'all got shafted by your educations." Big Man
True.
So what does this tell us Big Man?
Ask 10 black people to tell you the Rosa Parks story.
Ask 10 people to tell you the Marcus Garvey story.
...
All 10 black folks will tell you Rosa ... the bus ... too tired to give up seat ... refuse to move ... jail .. fingerprint ... the boycott ... MLK. "Victory" a year later.
Regarding Marcus Garvey ...
3 of the Black people will have heard the name, but won't be able to tell you anything of substance about Marcus Garvey.
4 of them will regurgitate the "Back To Africa" slogan ... and pretty much stop there.
2 of them will be openly hostile and dismissive. They will parrot Plantation memes designed to reduce and diminish the significance of the Garvey movement.
1 of them will tell you about the movement, PanAfricanism, the massive organization built by Garvey and the illegal persecution of the US Government.
...And you're the fav'rite White Boy of the Blackest Man on the Internet?
C'mon Thordaddy, you can do better than some Cracka type talk. You got things seriously twisted, Black revolutionary movements were in response to unjust subjugation in America, not as spontaneous movements to destroy as Mahndisa said.
The 'relationship being destroyed' was one of unequal power relations: that which White hegemony had over a Black minority. The 'relationship being destroyed' was also at a psychological level which taught Blacks to think of themselves as inferior to Whites and which disconnected Blacks in America from Africa. This is what Garvey tried to do and those many others who came after. And it was at a collective not individual level.
Funny thing is, America itself was borne out of a "liberal movement at root" to "destroy a PARTICULAR relationship" ...an imperial one with the British.
Lol, you might wanna rethink that claim abt "all liberal movements", fav'rite White Boy.
"1) who doesn't have "Afrikan" ancestry?
2) why would that "discovery" make anyone fearful or venomous?" DV
Why wld there have been years of denial if there was nothing to be 'feared'? Taking fear to mean:
"a state of nervousness fit for children and not men. When man fears a creature like himself he offends God, in whose image and likeness he is created. Man being created equal fears not man but God. To fear is to lose control of one's nerves, one's will—to flutter, like a dying fowl, losing consciousness, yet, alive."
Marcus Garvey
General qsn: has anyone ever read the original premature obituary for Garvey? I was looking for it online sometime ago, but couldn't find it.
Nice quote KW.
DV
I'm going to have to take your word for it on what happens when you talk to black folks about Rosa Parks and Marcus Garvey.
I agree that many folks would be ignorant about the man's legacy, but I have never seen the open hostility you have experienced.
Just a difference in our realities.
That said, I wanted to give a shout out to "that dude" for pointing out that while Garvey had an amazing message, he fell short at times in carrying out his mission.
Then again, given the mountain he had to climb, it's not really a failure that he didn't reach the summit.
KW I never did see the premature obituary. Big Man, I really wish I knew where you lived and where you grew up. I do recall seeing pictures of Marcus Garvey in elementary school but believe me, teachers never really taught much about him except his Back to Africa slogan; really. I grew up in East Oakland in a predominately Black neighborhood; lower income mind you. Once I moved to Modesto there was not one iota of Black history ever mentioned unless we were talking about slavery and civil rights movements.
Big Man you received a stellar education; don't take it for granted.
In my freshman year of high school 1990 we had a Black Student Union assembly for Black History Month. This gal was lecturing and all of a sudden this cowboy in the audience (yes he was a cowboy I live in a somewhat rural area) and said "Sit down nigger!". This was in 1990. You hear me? Best believe Marcus Garvey wasn't even mentioned in ANY level in high school. AT all. Was like he was invisible; never existed. His mindset, before he lost it, was far too radical to even teach in 1990!
As to your question DV, you are reaching a bit here. You call yourself the Blackest Man on the Internet but you can only define Blackness. Every time another person uses it, you quibble over their defintions.
So let me make it plain: J EDGAR HOOVER WAS AN ASSHOLE. His mulatto heritage makes his actions all the more egregious because he KNEW he was connected to the very people whose speech he was trying to silence. The connection to his dirty little secret drove him to overcompensate in ways that were unconscionable.
His internal hatred of that drop of Blackness drove him to commit great acts of evil.
And lest I ramble on something you very well knew the answer to anyway, I leave you with this KRS 1 quote:
"Every time a Black man speaks up kapow".-KRS1 Edutainment
"while Garvey had an amazing message, he fell short at times in carrying out his mission." Big Man
I disagree.
I think we fell short in picking up and carrying out what cats like him started.
To say Garvey failed is like saying Moses failed.
"So let me make it plain: J EDGAR HOOVER WAS AN ASSHOLE. His mulatto heritage makes his actions all the more egregious ..." M.R.
Overly simplistic.
Hoover was also a 33rd Degree Freemason. He was a participant in homosexual orgies. He was a Luciferian.
Read Kay Duuubs Garvey quote again.
...
That is why Garvey was slandered, sabotaged and eventually crucified.
My statements are not overly simplistic. Your understanding of history, however, seems to be lacking. One of the things you like to do is to pick and choose the things you like while obviously avoiding and evading other not so pleasant aspects...
Look, if a guy is a mulatto and hates that part of his heritage he'll do anything and everything to overcompensate for it. Same with a closet homosexual. If some guy is gay but doesn't want to come out, he can thrust all types of cruelty on himself and others for living a life of denial.
J Edgar Hoover was a study in denial practice as an art. You cannot tell me that this was not a strong motivating factor with his behavior.
As to quotes, MBradley's quotes were the most telling...There was no distinction made between Malcolm X and MLK or Garvey because the end goal to silence them was the same. The reputations being slung through the mud, the painting of these men as enemies of the state etc etc etc all point to a systematic goal to eliminate Black folks with a voice and the ability to raise consciousness levels.
I can and did read KW's statement. She was right. This is no state secret.
But let's be honest about Garvey as is Big Man.
Garvey made some poor business decisions and although had the vision, he did not have the background; the foundation to make it happen.
Furthermore,he lost his mind to egoism when he declared himself the Ruler of Africa, because in his mind, nobody else was qualified. That is egoism of the highest degree.
I think he had an outstanding vision and is worthy of study and respect, but you cannot put all of his issues on someone else like Hoover.
Hoover's minions that infiltrated the UNIA were foul but they would not have been able to cause so many problems if the organization itself was not on shaky ground.
Garvey could have been a big producer like Howard Hughes, the difference was in background. Hughes came from wealth and his mother fully supported his curiosities and was able to develop his intelligence and skills.
I wonder what things would have been like if Garvey came from a similar background.
Foundation is everything.
"There was no distinction made between Malcolm X and MLK or Garvey"?
What?
Come now.
The same people that slandered, sabotaged, persecuted and jailed Marcus Garvey because of his Black Nationalist Movement (anti-Plantation) are the same people that financed the Civil Rights Movement (pro-Plantation) and made MLK's birthday a national holiday.
MLK was allowed to function.
Marcus Garvey wasn't.
There lies the difference.
Garvey's blueprint included schools for black children run by black teachers with a curriculum designed by black people.
The Civil Rights Movement demanded to be integrated with white kids.
No difference?
Ya'll need to think about that one again.
DV
As is your habit, you have greatly oversimplified the Civil Rights Movement.
Moreover, you have blatantly ignored history, particularly the history regarding how the scions of the Civil Rights movements were treated during their day, not how they are presented today.
The college kids in Tennessee, Dr. King, the school children in Birmingham, all of those folks faced intense violence and reprecussions for their choses to demand the right to be treated as equals to white patrons at businesses across the South.
Now, given your prior arguments, I'm sure you would have preferred that those black folks organize their wealth and create their own separate entities. I can respect that argument, and see it's merit, particularly today.
But, as history shows, that option was limited back in the day. Black organizations and communities were actively targeted for infiltratrion and destruction if they obtained a level of success beyond what white folks deemed acceptable. As a minority in this country, black folks rightly understood that if they allowed themselves to be completely marginalized and ostracized from regular society it would only be a matter of time before they were summarily eliminated.
And so they choice to try to co-exist on somewhat equal terms.
We can debate the rightness or wrongness of that today, but to paint it like white folks just accepted the Civil Rights movement with open arms and pocketbooks is false.
"As is your habit, you have greatly oversimplified the Civil Rights Movement." Big Man
What did I miss?
Integration? Affirmative Action? Vote (with no real choice)? The "right" to work for people who would rather not have you?
Set-Aside contracts? Henry Louis Gates?
What am I missing?
"Moreover, you have blatantly ignored history, particularly the history regarding how the scions of the Civil Rights movements were treated during their day, not how they are presented today." Big Man
Correct me.
How were they "treated"?
How ... Big Man ... exactly was Rosa Parks "treated" for example?
(HINT: Think movie production)
"Moreover, you have blatantly ignored history, particularly the history regarding how the scions of the Civil Rights movements were treated during their day, not how they are presented today." Big Man
Correct me.
How were they "treated"?
How Big Man ... exactly .... were these Civil Rights 'scions' treated (financed, scripted and supported) compared to Garvey (entrapped, slandered and sabotaged)?
Same cats who set traps for Marcus Garvey financed MLK ... initially.
Eventually MLK chose the path of righteousness and sided with God against man (Vietnam War speech).
That's when they killed him.
The bastards were after Garvey from the jump.
Why?
" Man being created equal fears not man but God."
That message is anathema to Freemasonic Malthusian Luciferian occultist like Hoover and his set who wish to be God.
Quite clearly you don't read your comments DV. One of Makeru's comments above contained this quote:
'[From December 1963 until his death in 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr. was the target of an intensive campaign by the Federal Bureau of Investigation to "neutralize" him as an effective civil rights leader. In the words of the man in charge of the FBI's "war" against Dr. King:
“No holds were barred. We have used [similar] techniques against Soviet agents. [The same methods were] brought home against any organization against which we were targeted. We did not differentiate. This is a rough, tough business.”
'
I meant exactly what I said above. NO. There were no distinctions made between Garvey and MLK in the rhetoric. Both were painted as enemies of the state worthy of Hoover's attention and desire to fully and totally squash the voices of dissent.
Same principle with McCarthyism...you have to paint a person as your enemy both ideologically and in a real practical sense; this person is endangering your way of life etc etc etc
This is what they've done to all critics of social order throughout the ages.
MLK was allowed to function.
Marcus Garvey wasn't.
There lies the difference.DV
This is why I think your view of history is myopic. If you were being honest, you'd admit that MLK did not operate freely at all. The same assholes who kept files on Garvey and X are the same people who kept files on MLK. BOTH Garvey and MLK were allowed to function until they both became too big, then there was interference, sabotage etc. BUT in the end MLK was assassinated. Garvey died from other reasons.
Be honest.
DV you are lying and obfuscating the truth. Don't sully the legacy of the great civil rights leaders of last century by glossing over their accomplishments to further your agenda. Whatever that might be!
"Eventually MLK chose the path of righteousness and sided with God against man (Vietnam War speech)."DV
You are lying AGAIN! He chose the path of righteousness the minute he organized people to defy the prevailing social order of the day. Montgomery bus boycott anyone? That is as anti 'plantation' as you can get, pushing civil rights agendas via economic incentivation. That is also quite Garvyesque...but it is clear that you only have a cursory understanding of what these great men stood for...They tried to kill MLK not too long after the boycotts, haven't you ever read the letters he wrote in jail after being jailed and denied medical care, with a quasi collapsed lung?
History?
OK Mahndisa. Let's talk history.
But not that NPR / Black History Month / After-School Special Plantation Negro "We Shall Ovuh Cum ... Sum ... Day" head fake history with which you seem so comfortable.
Let's examine some INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIABLE history that has been kept away from you.
Let's start with some research by a few authors who have studied the flip side of the "Civil Rights" coin.
Jonathan Kaufman:
"The Jewish struggle for equality and fair treatment, was linked to the struggles of Blacks for greater opportunity.
It was not a struggle of equals; Jews did not consider their plight equal to that of Blacks.
But they recognized in the Black struggle for civil rights elements that could benefit them and conditions with which they sympathized." [MARTIN, p. 131]
Hence, perhaps three-quarters of the funding for the three major civil rights organizations -- the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, The Congress of Racial Equality, and Martin Luther King's Southern Christian Leadership Conference is attributed to Jewish sponsorship. [MARTIN, p. 132]
Israel Shahak:
"Any support of human rights in general by Jews, which does not include the support of human rights of non-Jews whose rights are being violated by [Israel] is deceitful ... [Jewish] support of Blacks in the South was motivated only by consideration of Jewish self-interest." [SHAHAK, p. 103]
Charles Liebman and Stephen Cohen:
"The major role [that Jews] once played in the civil rights movement,[is a] myth ... [that] enhances the self-image of a Jew as a caring and sensitive minority selflessly contributing to improve the lot of other minorities." [LIEBMAN/COHEN, p. 17]
"Among the many myths life and history have imposed on Negroes," wrote Black author Harold Cruse in 1967, "... is the myth that the Negroes' best friend is the Jew." [CRUSE, p. 476]
For years W.E.B. DuBois was the only Black officer in the NAACP, which was largely directed, funded, and controlled in its early decades by Jews like Henry Moskowitz and Joel Spingarn. [ARSON, p. 140] (In 1913 Spingarn announced a yearly award named after himself, the "Spingarn Medal," for the "highest and noblest achievement of an American Negro." [DINER, p. 138] )
Another Jew, Marvin Rich, was the "chief fundraiser and key speech writer for the Congress of Racial Equality -- CORE", [GINZBURG, p. 145] and his position was later filled by another Jewish attorney, Alan Gartner. In the 1960s, "in CORE, younger and more militant members blocked efforts by [James] Farmer to name one of his Jewish advisers president of CORE, insisting the post be filled with a black." [KAUFMAN, J., 1988, p. 76] In the same era, the Executive Director of the American Jewish Congress, Will Maslow, was also a CORE national board member. (He resigned in outrage when one African-American CORE official, Clifford Brown, angrily declared that Hitler hadn't "killed enough" Jews). [UROFSKY, M., 1978, p. 327]
DV
Have you read Taylor Branch's trilogy documenting King's life?
Have read David Halberstam's book about the Nashville Nine?
If you read some of the many books detailing the Civil Rights movement you will find that death threats were the norm and violence was common.
Hell, I had a cousin killed down in Mississippi, Herbert Hill, because he helped folks trying to register voters. Cuz was a landowner and independent family man but got murdered just for raising his head.
I know the story about Parks. I know she wasn't the first.
But, are you honestly invalidating an entire movement based on that one thing?
You?
Come on now.
DV
Are you being specific or waxing rhetorical abt the same people who killed Garvey funded MLK?
Is there a link between those Jews and the Feds i.e. Hoover and his boys killed Garvey & who'd been tracking MLK's every move since '57? Dec 63 was only the date of coming out the closet - an application for much, much closer surveillance had already been filed by Hoover months before, after the I Have A Dream speech.
DV
If you think Martin wasn't hounded throughout his whole career, then you haven't bothered to check your facts.
How many nights did Martin spend in jail?
How many times was he attacked?
How many times did King put his life on the line, not in the pursuit of money or success, but in an attempt to force America to confront its own hypocrisy?
Garvey and King weren't even contemporaries, so you'll have to explain how the "same" cats who financed King attacked Garvey. I'm willing to learn.
But, for you to gloss over the sacrifices of the black folks of the Civil Rights Era to champion Garvey is a bit ridiculous. For one, they two groups have very different aims.
Just like that Nation of Islam, Garvey promoted a vision of separatism that was built on the idea that white folks would leave black folks alone if we just got out of their sight. Which was truly bogus and idiotic given history.
Some thoughts from another source on Garvey:
The other side of Garvey's attack against "social equality" took the form of an assertion that "America is [a] White Man's Country." "Why should I waste time in a place where I am outnumbered and where if I make a physical fight I will lose out and ultimately die," Garvey asked. Garvey also managed to shift the blame for white America's racial exclusivity from white prejudice to black failings. In another broadside against DuBois, Garvey argued that "[Negroes] have done nothing praiseworthy on their own initiative in the last five hundred years to recommend them to the serious consideration of progressive races . . . . [T]hey have made no political, educational, industrial, independent contribution to civilization for which they can be respected by other races, thus making themselves unfit subjects for free companionship and association with races which achieved greatness on their own initiative."
Garvey was, in fact, attempting to present himself before the white American establishment as the potential architect of a new racial "compromise." This was, indeed, a far cry from the sentiment that Garvey voiced when, at the close of the August 1920 convention, he was reported in the Negro World of 11 September as having "hurled defiance at the 'crackers' of the South." During this period of political retreat, Garvey embarked on his various flirtations with Senator T. S. McCallum of Mississippi and with the infamous Ku Klux Klan, setting the precedent for his subsequent alliances with John Powell, leader of the Anglo-Saxon Clubs of America, with Earnest Sevier Cox, leader of the White America Society, and still later in the 1930s with Sen. Theodore G. Bilbo, the scourge of Mississippi black people.
Garvey, like many other black folks, thought he could compromise with evil in order to achieve his goals.
He failed.
Rather than admit that you were somewhat shortsighted you move to teacher mode where you attempt to share something that I'm not privy to. That, and putting words in my mouth as usual. Come up with another tactic DV!
Just like Big Man, I had a Great Uncle lynched in DeQuincy Lousiana in the 1920's. I had another great Uncle who had to flee Shreveport in the 1920's because a local mob of white men were trying to kill him.
Get over yourself! All of us Blacks who've had some history in this country KNOW our family stories and don't need a text book to tell us about oppression and lack of civil rights.
This is why your over simplifications are so disturbing. Just admit that MLK was a righteous man who forever impacted the world in a positive way. Same for Malcolm X and same for Garvey.
All of them wanted better for us. All of them became powerful in their lifetimes. Two of them were assassinated. One of them died from a broken heart. Don't bastardize their legacy by denying their impact and calling what they advocated 'plantation memes'. That's such an misreading of the truth.
DV said
Let's examine some INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIABLE history that has been kept away from you.
Let's start with some research by a few authors who have studied the flip side of the "Civil Rights" coin
Then you write some stuff about "the Jewz."
Negro please.
You think it's a bombshell to hear that Jewish people were looking out for themselves? That they financed the creation of the NAACP and the efforts of Dubois because they saw it as ultimately to their benefit.
That they established predatory lending and businesses in black communities?
Next you gonna' tell us that AIPAC is dangerous and only looking out for Israel's interests.
Say it ain't so.
What type of silliness are you pushing? Maybe the dumb Negroes you deal with off line are shocked and dismayed by these factoids, but come on son, most of the folks on this site have their eyes wide open.
You ain't hipping us to game.
The Jewz and everything else have nothing to do with the sacrifices made by men like MLK and the others who shed blood for Civil Rights.
Besides, you're the one spreading plantation lies.
See, it's the Plantation that taught you that King only started talking about poverty and non-violence later in life and that's when the press and government truly turned on him.
You are sadly mistaken.
Poverty was a part of King's conversation since he was a student in grad school. He was talking about non-violence in ALL FORM before he ever organized his first march on a lunch counter.
If you're going to criticize the man, at least get your stuff in order. You don't have to make stuff up, you don't have to distort. You can disagree with his tactics and his aims without resorting to lies.
Right?
And Big Man is right again! C'mon don't keep comparing apples to oranges. In the end, MLK's vision has come true to a large degree. And I think our society is a bit better because of it. If we all lived as separate entities, then there would be too many schisms.
I'm not saying that I don't believe in the wonderful quality of all Black communities, where they exist. More or less I'm talking about realizing the dream of Garvey or even Elijah Muhammed; that is having a separate state for Blacks. I don't think that would work because the underlying tensions that caused the separatist thoughts would not be addressed.
Otherwise, the KKK and Hoover would have left Garvey alone.
MR
Let's consider this whole "separate black state" thing.
1. If was to be a separate state in America it would have been based on the benevolence of white folks.
Did the NOI and Garvey learn nothing from the plight of the Indian? They would have bargained for a small piece of the American pie, with the hopes that white folks would honor said treaties?
Or that they and their miniscule armory would be able to fight off white folks intent on taking their land?
And they were visionaries?
Come on, we can all see the fallacy in that plan. Black folks would have been cheating themselves and setting themselves up for mass murder to accept that plan.
Anyway MR, you're wasting your time trying to find a middle ground or a viewpoint that encompasses several schools of thoughts.
DV is selective in how he applies that sort of thinking, and this ain't one of those topics. Pretty soon he's going to go into full-blown "Y'all is some Plantation Negroes to the core" mode and rail about how ungrateful we are for not falling to our knees and thanking him for providing us with these amazing jewels.
There will be some insults, maybe a gratuitous "peasant" thrown in, and, if we're lucky, some rhyming.
MLK was a righteous man?
I think that is an understatement.
I think MLK was a son of God.
That doesn't meant the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, like nearly every other major civil rights organization, wasn't a creation of someone else.
That someone else had an agenda.
That agenda wasn't necessarily in the best interest of your cousins getting killed in the south.
Just as the "Save Darfur" organizations today are the creation of people other than the Darfurians, and ultimately represent the interests of people other than the Darfurians .... the Civil Rights "Movement" of yesterday was a collection of memes most often crafted and marketed by people other than the innocent Negros it claimed to champion.
That doesn't mean the people involved in the Civil Rights Movement were not good people.
It doesn't mean that some of them were not extraordinary people.
It does mean they were pawns ... until they broke off on their ideological own ... as did MLK.
Then you write some stuff about "the Jewz." Negro please. Big Man
Come on Big Man.
Even people who still eat pork know better than that.
I didn't write anything "about Jews".
Jews wrote that about Jews.
What does that tell you about the Civil Rights Movement?
Are you conditioned to ignore that bit of Civil Rights architecture?
Why would you consider a failed political strategy sacrosanct?
"If you think Martin wasn't hounded throughout his whole career, then you haven't bothered to check your facts." Big Man
Hounded?
sure.
Investigated?
yup.
Wire tapped?
un huh.
Surveilled?
damn right.
Temporarily Jailed?
yup.
Allowed to function?
yup.
What happened after he began to bite the hand that thought it was feeding him?
He was killed.
DV
You are too smart not to be able to read my posts.
I never said that anything was sacrosanct.
I said you were oversimplifying the struggle and you were doing an injustice to Civil Rights leaders with your initial posts.
If you're argument is that the Civil Rights movements was underwritten by groups that didn't have the best interests of black folks in mind, then fine, I agree.
But, are you going to apply that same standard to everything you highlight on this blog?
Cause Lord knows that many, MANY of the cats you highlight here have ulterior motives.
KW dropped knowledge on that Lord Monckton cat a while bat.
CNulan is consistently exposing the ulterior motives of other cats you agree with.
So, why are the people behind the Civil Rights movement important, but the folks behind these other groups are not?
What's up with that?
Me and my bacon sandwich are waiting.
"DV
Are you being specific or waxing rhetorical abt the same people who killed Garvey funded MLK?
Is there a link between those Jews and the Feds i.e. Hoover and his boys killed Garvey & who'd been tracking MLK's every move since '57? Dec 63 was only the date of coming out the closet - an application for much, much closer surveillance had already been filed by Hoover months before, after the I Have A Dream speech." KW
Great question KW.
Link between Jews and Feds?
I think describing certain people "as the Jews" is problematic.
A handful of people who happen to be Jewish no more represent "the Jews" than a handful of mafia thugs represent "the" Italians.
These particular Jews happen to have some things in common with these "particular" men like J. Edgar Hoover.
It is not that all purpose "whiteness" that my man Mak B alludes that these men have in common.
The common denominator behind the men who sabotaged Garvey and initially sponsored King is ideological and spiritual.
The same sick Malthusian nuts plotting against Marcus Garvey in the 20's and spying on MLK in the 60's are lying about WMD's, tampering with the food supply and spying on Americans today.
Hoover was a 33rd degree Mason.
How else do you think he became head of what would later become the Federal Bureau of Investigation at 24 years old?
"If you're argument is that the Civil Rights movements was underwritten by groups that didn't have the best interests of black folks in mind, then fine," I agree. Big Man
That's a big step Big Man.
We should let that sink in for a second.
"KW dropped knowledge on that Lord Monckton cat a while bat." Big Man
I must have missed that.
But it doesn't matter.
If Lord Monckton was sponsored by the Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan ... it doesn't matter.
There is more polar ice than we have been led to believe - check it out.
The mean temperature of the planet has cooled over the past 15 years - not gotten warmer. Fact.
The Polar Bears are not threatened. They are thriving. Fact.
The earth has had much warmer periods prior to industrialization and carbon emissions: Fact.
I don't give a SHIT about Lord Monckton personally.
What he champions is independently verifiable.
The Civil Rights Movement conditioned Negros to equate "integration" and "jobs" with "equality".
We sent our children to schools run by our oppressors and allowed the government to adopt us as it's fucking children.
Today Negros don't even know how to feed themselves and still quote "government edicts" as if it is sacrosanct.
Garvey, The Honorable Elijhah Mohammad, were not "underwritten" because they represented TRUE threat to Plantation hegemony.
That. Is. The. Difference.
DV
What I said wasn't particularly Earth shattering.
Come on, Dubois had to fight with his Jewish benefactors for years when he wrote something that criticized one of their sacred cows or organizations through his work with the NAACP.
He ultimately grew disillusioned with how this so-called liberals were unwilling to truly remove the false obstacles in the path of black success. His relationship with the NAACP was beyond strained when he died.
Booker T. had the same sort of problems after his white benefactors found he was stepping outside of their preferred boundaries.
Frederick Douglass and Sojourner Truth could tell you the same thing about abolitionists.
It's a recurring them in black history in this country. White folks are willing to work with you so far, then things get dicey. That is not new or profound, at least I would hope it's not for the intelligent and well-read folks who visit this blog.
Now, you keep talking about cats "turning on" King, but my contention is that they were never on his team.
The fact that he hadn't been assainated earlier was the work of God, not the work of some mysterious benefactors.
Finally, what are your thoughts on Garvey's attempts to placate the racial fears of whites and to cozy up to racists in order to further his goals?
Saavy or sad?
DV
How can they not be underwritten when they were going hat in hand to racists and oppressors begging for land and promising them they didn't want none of the White Folks Stuff?
There ain't nothing on this planet that is White Folks Stuff. You a student of African history and you cosigning Garvey's comments about how black folks needed to "learn" from Europeans how to be civilized?
What the hell is that?
You don't care who underwrites Monckton, but you do care who underwrote MLK?
Why?
Was King's message less "observably true?"
If you can check the polar ice, you can examine the humanity of black people and see that it is in NO WAY inferior to that of white folks.
If you can determine that GMO food is bad for black folks, then I'm sure you can tell that America's founding ideals should have guaranteed black folks full rights and citizenship. You would see that we were being denied our just due through the threat of arms by men whose entire beings were steeped in hypocrisies.
"Come on, Dubois had to fight with his Jewish benefactors" Big Man
benefactors?
Benefactors or Puppet Masters?
DuBois was a tool Big Man.
Good man.
Shining example of a civilized Negro.
He took classes at Harvard behind a screen yada yada.
But what REAL value was all that?
He was a spokesman for Negros but his paycheck was cut by Jews.
OK so he had his lips poked out 60 years later before he died in Ghana.
I love the man.
But he was no Marcus Garvey.
I think it is a mistake to approach Garvey as a 'flawed dreamer' who ultimately shot himself in the foot.
Garvey should be regarded as the man who identified the most effective and powerful road for our people and did everything humanely possible to set us on that road at a time when most Negros wouldn't even look white men in the eye.
He was fighting the Plantation before Negros even knew they were still on a plantation. (just like today)
Any man advocating that black folks vacate America and their claim to this land had a flawed outlook on the world.
We built this thang.
We have as much right to this country as any group outside, maybe, possibly, the Native Americans, and some books say we were here before them setting up shop.
Anybody telling black folks their best bet is the leave America to the White Folks 'cause it's theirs is tripping.
If you can't see that, we can't come to an agreement.
"If you can determine that GMO food is bad for black folks, then I'm sure you can tell that America's founding ideals should have guaranteed black folks full rights and citizenship." Big Man
No.
Wrong.
GMO food sterilizes and poisons all folks. Black white whatever.
Black people are not the only victims.
White people are not the only villains.
Let that old black / white dialectic play out.
"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."
The Civil Rights Movement "guaranteed black folks" nothing.
We lost more with the Patriot Act than we did during Jim Crow.
As long as Negros are ASKING for full rights and citizenship they will never get it.
Self Affirm.
Garvey all day baby.
"Any man advocating that black folks vacate America and their claim to this land had a flawed outlook on the world." Big Man
Short sighted.
The cats who encouraged Jewish Americans to claim the land they now called Israel were brilliant though weren't they?
Look at what the relationship with Israel has done for Jewish Americans. It has achieved an elevated class status in this country and untold wealth.
Garvey encouraged a relationship between African Americans and mineral resource rich Africa at a time when Europeans were raping the motherland of its wealth.
Imagine if we had listened to him, began that two way cultural and resource relationship with Africa in the 1920's instead of spending the past 80 years chasing the Head Fake of "equality" via legislation.
Any people who "receive" their rights from Congress can have those rights taken away by Congress (Patriot Act / National Health Care etc.)
Garvey all day baby.DV
Given the fact that you stubbornly cling to incorrect notions and oversimplifications this is no surprise. The funny thing is that you don't apply Garveyism in your personal affairs. You put a picture of yourself playing golf with a white fellow a few days ago. You aren't a separatist.
Garvey became mentally ill over time. His egoism and lack of foundation took him over at one point, again when he declared himself the ruler of Africa.
Are you so interested in saving face that you would cling to the ideas of a madman in one breath and vilify MLK in the next? Your thought processes are interesting to say the least?
The cats who encouraged Jewish Americans to claim the land they now called Israel were brilliant though weren't they?DV
That is an interesting diversionary question isn't it DV?
Dang...
This thread evidence of radical autonomy
Got theez cats preachin' equality
ON.A.BLOG.BOUT.BLACKSUPREMACY
Claimin' black liberation ain't bout bein' free
'Merican opppression,
White supremacy
And that slave legacy...
THAT'S JUST UH CRACKA STORY!!!
Magne, u drinkin' Hennessey???
U crazy?
WHO STRIVES FOR EQUALITY???
That dunnit ian make sense...
Yur MIND n a state of suspense...
This yur anti-liberation stance,
And u don't stand uh chance...
You braggin' bout bein' free
Free 2b n uh momentary trance...
Talkin' out boaf sides ur mouf
Be free 2b unfree is how you advance???
This advance towards radical autonomy
Gotjew by duh pants...
Garvey mo' radical than MLK
Thats y King had many mo army ants...
His goals where tempered
He traded Cans for Cant's
Can't have no Supremacists
Can't have no seperation
We want equality
With full integration...
But this is ANTI-BLACK LIBERATION...
Just uh cracka story, though...
Advancin' cracka stories 'cross a nation...
Don't cross this nation
Be free Negro
Be free tuh leave the plantation...
LOL, how many polar bears have you been counting lately, Son?
"Thriving" is hardly the word to describe a dying population.
Monckton is a Cracker, a liar and a pseudo-scientist. Fact. Anutha post, anutha thread.
Back to Garvey & MLK:
Outta interest do 'oppressor schools' still exist?
And I give maaad props to Garvey, but he did a 360 on, Haile Selassie I and went from hailing HIM to criticising HIM. Plus he used to revere Tennyson & take pride in his Scotch linx meanwhile telling Black people to read Black authors. I've come to terms with it n reasoned with otha pple but still I don't brush it aside in recognizing what Garvey was.
And if we comparing Black leaders in the US, Malcom X over Garvey n MLK anyday baaaby!
LOL, Thordaddy you can put your pom poms down, now iKnow how you earn fav'rite White Boy status.
You say one thing then the minute you hear DV's side y'switch. Y'think ALL liberation movements are anti-American, Communism is anti-American, Black seperation from America is bad and that's all Garvey right thuuuur, but now you ink a few bars in support of Garvey - puhleeze, whatchu know abt that?
I'm sure you lurve your boy, DV, it's quite sweet really, but iSee you.
Konwomyn,
You still haven't defined black liberation.
I define black liberation as such (the American context):
The absolute autonomy of both the collective black psyche and individual black "American" from American white supremacy and American exceptionalism.
Black liberation is fundamentally a seperatist creed AS ALL LIBERATIONIST MOVEMENTS must be BY DEFINITION.
Noting the American Revolutionary as a liberationist movement does nothing to rebut what I've said. So the start of America was a liberationist movement???
Ok...
Define black liberation?
Tell us how you'll know of your liberation?
"The funny thing is that you don't apply Garveyism in your personal affairs. You put a picture of yourself playing golf with a white fellow a few days ago. You aren't a separatist." M.R.
Nah Mahndisa.
I wasn't playing golf with a white fellow.
That was my caddie.
Garvey all day baby.
Konwomyn,
If you believe in integrated equality then you are anti-black liberation.
Why wasn't your caddy a Black boy? Then you would've been supporting Black economic enterprise.
Garvey indeed :P
TD just puts up false dichotomies to stimulate conversation. You're wasting your breath KW.
Thor
Nope I believe in equality period.
M. Rigmaiden,
I suppose we will never hear again you speaking bad of one inclined to act with racial motivation (as long as violence isn't involved, of course).
M. Rigmaiden,
Then you don't believe in caddies, black or otherwise.
Mahndisa
This Son of Garvey doesn't see race - there is no such thing as 'race' so to begin to speak of a White caddy is to speak of that which does not exist and is an attempt to create difference. How that matches up with Garvey, he is yet to articulate. I'd be quite interested to know, no joke.
TD, my family is Black & multiracial. I truly could give a damn about people's race. However, in the context of the discussion our host has claimed that he is a Garveyite. If that is the case, he is supposed to live in a separate Black enclave (if he can) and he is supposed to support Black businesses first and foremost.
Therefore, by his own criteria he was not acting particularly Garveyesque because he used a white caddy rather than a Black one.
I support businesses that provide the things I like to consume at a good price AND with good service. I have relationships with humans who I deem competent and trustworthy. Race is not a component to this criteria. End of story.
Yes KW, welcome to the world of DV's inconsistencies. He will not attempt to correct noted discrepancies. We will see more obfuscation, calling out of 'plantation negroes, references to diversionary and or peripheral topics and perhaps a rhyme if we're lucky;)
M. Rigmaiden,
Your racial motivations for insisting DV get a black caddy for economic reasons is hardly different than DV's racial motivation for get a white caddy thereby establishing a black > white hierarchy and hence evidence of black supremacy.
You are arguing from the same side.
"our host has claimed that he is a Garveyite." M.R.
No.
I'm a DVite.
If all you take from Garvey is "separate" & "back to Africa" you need to look deeper.
Or just take my word for it.
Actually, a Son of Garvey would be a Marxist or some type of Communist so he may not even have a caddie or play golf for leisure, even drive a Benz or wear a Brioni suit.
And even if he did, have all those nice things, a Son of Garvey wouldn't address people by their job title, but by their name (even a made up one) - getting away from race also means getting away from class, Son of Garvey.
No. I'm not arguing from the same side as DV at all TD. Because he didn't state that he got the white caddy to establish a heirarchy; YOU said that!
And yes KW you have some points.
Naw DV that isn't all I see when I look at Garvey but you've put yourself into a hole simply to prove a point.
The Garveyites I've known always were pretty conscious about where their dollars went. And in particular ALWAYS went out of their way to support Black businesses.
So you didn't use a Black caddy. Why? Were there none available at your golf course?
who doesn't have "Afrikan" ancestry?
It’s not an issue unless you deny it, as tens of thousands of people classified as “colored” or “negro” did during slavery and American Apartheid, while crossing the color barrier.
2) why would that "discovery" make anyone fearful or venomous? DV, you can’t be serious.
[Hoover's remarkable career path would undoubtedly never have been possible, had it been known to have had black ancestry in his family background. In the decade of his birth, so-called Jim Crow laws were re-instituted through the South. Under the infamous Democratic Presidency of Woodrow Wilson (when Hoover began his career in the Justice Department), segregation was reinstituted throughout the Federal civil service, which had been exempted from Jim Crow laws. And under the prevailing "one drop'' rule, any amount of black blood or ancestry would exclude a person from most positions or careers - and certainly from high government positions.]-- Seán Mac Mathúna
As regards the venom, self-hatred is a mother.
While a student at George Washington University, Hoover joined the Kappa Alpha Order which was considered by some pundits to be "college auxiliary of the Ku Klux Klan".
"In about 90% of the situations in which Bureau personnel referred to Negroes, the word 'Nigger' was used and always in a very derogatory manner.'' (Richard Gid Powers, Secrecy and Power: The Life of J. Edgar Hoover, 1987, p. 367).
See also: http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300106350
The bastards were after Garvey from the jump.—DV
What year is “the jump?” I don’t see it on any historical calendar? Once you determine the year, provide the documentation to validate this claim.
MLK was allowed to function.—DV
The lack of historical knowledge is astounding. MLK’s home was bombed in 1956.
http://mlk-kpp01.stanford.edu/index.php/encyclopedia/chronologyentry/1956_01_30/
KW is correct. Government surveillance of Dr. King clearly did not begin in 1963. It most definitely intensified that year. Actually the King family had been under some form of government surveillance since 1917—an actual date vs “the jump.”
[In an eye-opening investigative report for the Memphis Commercial Appeal on March 21, 1993, Stephen Tompkins wrote that the Army's intelligence branch "spied on the family of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. for three generations," often targeting black ministers such as King's father. "The spying was born of a conviction by top Army intelligence officers that black Americans were ripe for subversion-first by agents of the German Kaiser, then by Communists, later by the Japanese and eventually by those opposed to the Vietnam War. At first, the Army used a reporting network of private citizens that included church members, black businessmen . . . and black educators . . . It later employed cadres of infiltrators, wiretaps, and aerial photography by U-2 spy planes."]-- Edward Olshaker
DV, if you ever get tired of shooting from the hip on this subject, you may want to start your education with this book.
http://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/1141538
M. Rigmaiden,
DV is a black Supremacist.
MB is a black supremacist.
Lil man is bouncing in between.
These doods argue hierarchy as supremacists and only use "equality" as a means to maximize their autonomy. You do as much BUT are oblivious to your actions.
You believe in equality but it does not exist.
SO YOU MUST FORCE IT ON ALL OF US.
Supremacy is exclusive, you see.
It does not require your oppression.
Konwomyn,
We see that you're not into defining things. So as far as you're concerned, black liberation does not exist. You, as I've stated earlier, live an anti-black liberationist existence. You are in a state of radical autonomy where black liberation has no meaning.
MB,
You still haven't told us why Americans who surveil, marginalize and delegitimize communists are evil.
In fact, it is the moral duty of Americans to put into disrepute all anti-American sentiments. Such is the makings of liberation.
Bro Makheru
Thank you for that truth!
Everything else is talk.
“MLK’s home was bombed in 1956.”-MB
Because King was a target of hatred is no testimony to the effectiveness of his philosophy. Mike Wallace put out, “The Hate that Hate Produced” in 1959. After that, King had been received better. Frederick Douglass wouldn’t be so revered if it weren’t for Nat Turner and Denmark Vesey to give Douglass perspective.
Malcolm X said:
"At one time the whites in the United States called him a racialist, and extremist, and a Communist. Then the Black Muslims came along and the whites thanked the Lord for Martin Luther King."
Even the black woman that stabbed King with a letter opener did so out of fear of him provoking white terror. That terror obviously was already present. All it took was to look at a white woman wrong. MLK was dangled in front of black America as “appropriate resistance” (by awarding King with a Noble Peace Prize).
For maximum effectiveness of the Counterintelligence Program, and
to prevent wasted effort, long-range goals are being set.
1. Prevent the COALITION of militant black nationalist groups. In
unity there is strength; a truism that is no less valid for all its
triteness. An effective coalition of black nationalist groups might be the
first step toward a real "Mau Mau" [Black revolutionary army] in America,
the beginning of a true black revolution.
2. Prevent the RISE OF A "MESSIAH" who could unify, and
electrify, the militant black nationalist movement. Malcolm X might have
been such a "messiah;" he is the martyr of the movement today. Martin
Luther King, Stokely Carmichael and Elijah Muhammed all aspire to this
position. Elijah Muhammed is less of a threat because of his age. King
could be a very real contender for this position SHOULD HE ABANDON his
supposed "obedience" to "white, liberal doctrines" (nonviolence) and embrace
black nationalism. Carmichael has the necessary charisma to be a real
threat in this way.
-F.B.I. memorandum, March 4, 1968
Eventually MLK had to concede to some of the complaints of the children (ideological heirs) of Malcolm X and Robert F. Williams. Which is a testament to his humility.
“As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they ask -- and rightly so -- what about Vietnam? They ask if our own nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today - my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.”
-MLK: Beyond Vietnam, A Time to Break Silence
“I maintain that every Civil Rights Bill in this country was passed for white people not for black people. For example, I am black. I know that. I also know that while I am black I am a human being. Therefore I have right to go into every public place. White people didn’t know that. Every time I try to go into a public place they stop me. So some boys had to write a bill to tell that white man he’s a human being don’t stop him. That bill was for that white man not for me, I knew it all the time. ”
-Stokely Carmichael; UC Berkeley
“It is ironic that when most Americans think of Malcolm X, they think of him as un-American or anti-American. However this is no doubt due to confusion between his being against certain government policies, as opposed to being anti-American. When we look unemotionally at the political philosophy of Malcolm X, there can be little doubt that Malcolm’s values represented a far greater integration into the American majority value system than, say, the political philosophy of the honorable Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. While King’s absolute belief in non-self-defense or nonresistance against violent aggression reflected strong Hindu or Buddhist orientation, Malcolm’s philosophy was really about the same as any majority American would hold, given similar circumstances and grievances. In short, Malcolm’s values were no less American than were the values leading to the revolutionary wars of 1776 and 1812, the Civil War, and those leading to the First and Second World Wars. It is a paradox in the US system that once a black strives towards the societal goal of assimilation of majority values, this must automatically mean opposition to the majority’s privileged position, and thus his castigation as being un-American or anti-American.”
-The Black Book; The True Political Philosophy of Malcolm X
Thank. You. Gee Chee
Thank You...
All that unnecessary arguing.
Was MLK jailed?
Yup.
Was MLK attacked?
Yup.
Was MLK threatened?
Yup.
Does that mean to that he was not sponsored ... and allowed to operate by others ....
no.
MLK was jailed, attacked and threatened by the targets of his handlers.
NOT BY HIS HANDLERS.
MLK was given the Nobel Peace Prize and Police Protection and permission to March On Washington.
Marcus Garvey was the victim of slander and false charges and a disinformation campaign that exists to this day.
10 years after his death I was reading MLK Comic Books in public school.
20 years later his birthday is a National Holiday.
Why?
The early memes of MLK are useful to those in the process of reshaping America to the way that they want to see it.
As MLK branched off ... and as he talked more about One God and America's "arrogance" (playing God) ... he became a victim of his former sponsors.
But make no mistake about it ... Martin Luther King was ALLOWED to function in the early years just as Barack Hussein Obama is allowed to function today.
Let Obama question the role of foreign interests in the affairs of America.
Let Obama challenge the efficacy of Plantation medicine, banking and insurance.
Let Obama question the wisdom of one-sided support of Israel.
Then you will appreciate the difference between those "allowed" to operate vs those who operate despite permission from the Plantation.
Marcus Mosiah Garvey baby.
MB, You still haven't told us why Americans who surveil, marginalize and delegitimize communists are evil. --Thor
My focus here is on Garvey, King and Hoover’s FBI. You’re off on your own tangent.
Gee Chee this was my initial point: The real plantation negroes are those who have eyes, but they can’t see that the enemies of Afrikan liberation made no distinction between Marcus Garvey, Malcolm X and Martin King, in their efforts to neutralize them.
I wrote that statement because I'm into synthesis versus the fragmentation implied in the topic sentence of this discussion.
Because King was a target of hatred is no testimony to the effectiveness of his philosophy.—Gee
And what philosophy was it that brought about the collapse of American Apartheid? Certainly not the philosophy of Robert Williams or that of Max Stanford. And I love Robert and Mabel Williams. I remember my parents telling me that they heard Brother Williams speak at a NAACP meeting in Charlotte. I would eventually meet this brave man after he returned to the US from exile. I personally know many people who fought back during the Civil Rights Movement. They were the people I admired the most. They were critical factors to the success that the movement achieved, but the philosophy that carried the day was that of Martin Luther King, Jr.
Of course we know that white supremacy has been refined into different forms—mass racial incarceration, etc. That’s our struggle. Dr. King fought his before he was taken out of his historical development.
OBTW, when you’re quoting Malcolm and Kwame Ture, whom I knew personally through Willie “Mukasa” Ricks and Cleve Sellers, you’re preaching to the choir, but by all means preach on!!!!!!!!!!
But make no mistake about it ... Martin Luther King was ALLOWED to function in the early years—DV
Was Marcus Garvey ALLOWED to function in his early years? And why are you still fighting these “either or” battles, rather than building on the best of both?
Apr 6, 2010 9:53:00 AM = Makheru Bradley
"the enemies of Afrikan liberation made no distinction between Marcus Garvey, Malcolm X and Martin King" MB
Yeah.
When you are off from work for "Marcus Garvey" day ... let us know.
"Of course we know that white supremacy has been refined into different forms—mass racial incarceration, "
white ... black ... white ... black ... white ... black
Get over that.
Anachronistic dialectic.
Whites are just as much victims of these Luciferian puppeteers as are blacks.
Divide and conquer.
Divide and conquer.
Is that why you're pushing this fragmentation?
"the enemies of Afrikan liberation made no distinction between Marcus Garvey, Malcolm X and Martin King" MB
That’s correct. They were all neutralized.
[Hoover had first waged a campaign against Marcus Garvey and the black nationalist movement from 1919 to 1923. He launched the infamous campaign to destroy Dr. Martin Luther King when in 1957, Hoover ordered the FBI to monitor King and his Southern Christian Leadership Conference, when it began a campaign to register eligible black voters in the racist South. Throughout his life in the 1960's before he was murdered by persons unknown suspected of working for the US government, the FBI ruthlessly targeted King. Thus, it is no surprise that when the news came through over the radio that King had been killed shot in Memphis on April 4th, 1968 there were jubilant cries of "They got the SOB!'' that reverberated through the Atlanta FBI office. One former FBI agent recalled another agent shouting "We finally got the son of a bitch!'' (Curt Gentry, J. Edgar Hoover: The Man and the Secrets, 1991, p. 606; Anthony Summers, Official and Confidential: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover, 1993, p. 364). Hoover's FBI also waged an total war against other Black liberation figures such as Malcolm X and the Black Panthers - 38 of whom were killed in suspicious circumstances.]-- Seán Mac Mathúna
When you are off from work for "Marcus Garvey" day ... let us know.—DV
I don’t need government authorization to celebrate on May 19 and August 17.
white ... black ... white ... black ... white ... black Get over that.—DV
All of this talk about the Honorable Marcus Mosiah Garvey and now you’re going color-blind. Simply amazing!
Since the timing of specific neutralizations seem to matter so much to you, can you at least defend your premise and answer the question: Was Marcus Garvey ALLOWED to function in his early years?
MB
Now, you've been here long enough to know that question is going to be ignored. You know and I know that Garvey was "allowed" to establish a nationwide organization with dues paying members.
How could he not be allowed in a country where he openly admitted he had little freedom and no true power?
The man's own quotes establish his thoughts on the power dynamic in America and his thoughts on black folks in general.
"The other side of Garvey's attack against "social equality" took the form of an assertion that "America is [a] White Man's Country." "Why should I waste time in a place where I am outnumbered and where if I make a physical fight I will lose out and ultimately die," Garvey asked. Garvey also managed to shift the blame for white America's racial exclusivity from white prejudice to black failings. In another broadside against DuBois, Garvey argued that "[Negroes] have done nothing praiseworthy on their own initiative in the last five hundred years to recommend them to the serious consideration of progressive races . . . . [T]hey have made no political, educational, industrial, independent contribution to civilization for which they can be respected by other races, thus making themselves unfit subjects for free companionship and association with races which achieved greatness on their own initiative"
DV is flip-flopping more that a fish on a hook.
He keeps bringing up these "Plantation Negroes" who hate Marcus Garvey.
Where does he meet them?
How come I've never encountered them despite growing up in a majority black city and attending majority black schools almost my entire life?
Where are these black bogeymen who hate Garvey?
They weren't present during the black history programs at my school or church. They are not present here on this blog.
Nope, they exist in the circles that DV travels. Which of course begs the question:
"What type of Planatation Negroes is DV rolling with in his off time?"
The MLK legacy has been accredited for far more than what it has accomplished. For King to doubt the intended effectiveness of his own work towards his last days I believe is a testament to that. Harry Belafonte says King’s last words to him were, ‘I sit here deeply concerned that I suspect we’re leading our nation on an integration trip that has us integrating into a burning house.’
Even though King is the poster child for the reformation of many of the laws, still there exists a condescending undertone. Consequently, Hillary Clinton will make statements like, “Dr King’s dream began to be realised when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It took a president to get it done.”
No politician can say that the accomplishments of Garvey or Elijah or even Black Wall Street. No one can argue that their accomplishments were contingent on a president or a policy to fulfill their objectives. Their sociological contributions were through institution building outside of government assistance. If anything, their ideas fulfilled the “bootstrap” axiom.
When you are off from work for "Marcus Garvey" day ... let us know.—DV
They tell us to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps but don’t really want it. Acknowledging Garvey, cosigns his philosophy of control and support of segregated institutions. Support the conveyor belt/commodified/pre-packaged MLK profile (before he got on tv without one disparaging statement against the Panthers when asked about their methods) and you reinforce a belief in the system.
Probably the most revolutionary contemporary MC was Pimp C of UGK. He didn’t through sawdust on the flo’ for a lil’ soft shoe to a “rock the vote” jingle. He was calling for rappers to do what Garvey was calling for black people to do. Drugs do not make drug-lords into killers, money do. Corporations, record companies aren’t excluded.
Now that is opening doors for other MC’s and breaking racial barriers does only that. Someone else still distributes the product and has the say so of your creative control. So Lil Wayne can believe that he is saying whatever he wants to say until he starts fixing his lips to challenge certain social ills. He’ll be made to look like he’s crazy like Katt Williams after that stand up talking about GMOs.
That is the meaning behind being ‘allowed.’ Integration was never perceived as a threat to the viability of government infrastructures. Building future “Black Wall Streets” is threatening to the viability of government infrastructures.
Big Man, here is a beautiful lady who I wonder about. I truly wonder what she might say about Marcus Garvey who really did speak to so called conservative principles. Do you think she can reconcile her constituency and support network's agenda if she speaks of Malcolm X and Marcus Garvey in a POSITIVE light? If she does that, I will respect her. Sadly though, I see a pretty lady who mimics the same old talking points.
Post a Comment