"Dayum, those outsiders be some tricky bastards. They tricked Mrs. Parks into being arrested. They tricked E.D. Nixon and Jo Ann Robinson into using the Parks case to organize a boycott.They tricked those simple negroes in Montgomery into organizing an Improvement Associated, and tricked them into electing a young minister, whose small church sat in the shadows of the Alabama state capitol to lead that organization.
Clearly there was no evidence of kujichagulia amongst the Black folks of Montgomery in 1955-56. Just a group of inferior people being tricked by liberal white supremacists." Makheru BradleyThe real opiate is that “rub your titties” type of garbage you post periodically. Remember, in America, entertainment is the opiate of the masses. Makheru Bradley
Denmark Vesey said ..
Apparently, MB, the "Civil Rights Movement" ... was entertainment too.
Another type of opiate for the masses.
Imagine what we could have built if we weren't busy marching for legislation? (actually, if we weren't being marched)
O. Mahogany said...
Simple. Rosa was definitely the poster child for the simple lives of black families in the south. I feel I can say this as I was born right in Alabama...This reminds me of a short conversation between my uncle and I. One day after he found out about my college acceptance letters and scholarships (he was very proud bless his heart) he said:
"[O.Mahogany] ;) you know your aunt was one of the first black Greyhound bus drivers in the country."
LMAO. I thought you gotta be kidding me. My aunt should've owned Greyhound!! My college tuition should be funded by Greyhound revenue. Instead while many of my family members (not all) were no doubt doing some time on a plantation, a sweden immigrant moved to the states and started an 18 bus line with his partner and in less than ten years reaped annual profits of $50,000. Why the fugg (wink @DV) should I be impressed by my aunt?
As for Rosa, I truly love the woman. She really has a heart of gold. But I think there was lot of time spent on the fundamental feeling of rebellion and not enough on systematic economic goals. In the end we got a law stating it was illegal to segregate buses? Even IF IT WAS ENFORCED who cares? Rosa still took that bus to a piss ass job with the white folks. And what's worse is the woman died broke! And I LOVE Rosa ya'll!! She is the epitome of southern charm, patience and intelligence. But Southern girls are taught to be nice obedient and christian.
Why the fuck was she riding the bus anyway? We should've all had cadillacs. lol. And you don't have to be rich or too educated to know you deserve more.
47 comments:
I don't think it was staged. It happened at the right time and opportunistic persons took advantage.
Sigh...
I'd like to hear the rundown on what we could have accomplished.
Then I'd like to hear the explanation of how the Civil Rights movement prevented that from happening.
I'm unclear how the Civil Rights movement prevented the movements of the NOI and Marcus Garvey from flourishing.
Please expound.
Start with the above photo first!
Image is everything.Thanks Andre.
I don't think a guy with a camera was on that bus.
mmmmm..... Who is the white guy behind her.
"The man on the bus, Nicholas C. Chriss, was not some irritated Alabama segregationist preserved for history but a reporter working at the time for United Press International out of Atlanta. He died of an aneurysm at 62 in 1990. Mrs. Parks died at 92 on Oct. 24, a few weeks short of the 50th anniversary of her refusal to give up her seat on the bus to a white man."
He explained that the picture was taken on Dec. 21, 1956, the day after the United States Supreme Court ruled Montgomery's segregated bus system illegal. (Actually, the ruling had come a month earlier, but it was not until Dec. 20 that the district court entered the order putting it into effect.) He said that he boarded the bus in downtown Montgomery and that he and Mrs. Parks were the only riders up front.
"He wrote: "It was a historic occasion. I was then with the United Press International wire service. A UPI photographer took a picture of Mrs. Parks on the bus. It shows a somber Mrs. Parks seated on the bus looking calmly out the window. Seated just behind her is a hard-eyed white man."
From New York times:
"Mr. Brinkley said Mrs. Parks told him that she had left her home at the Cleveland Courts housing project specifically for a picture on a bus, and that the idea was for her to be seated in the front of the bus with a white man behind. Similar photo opportunities were arranged for the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and others during the day, he said.
Mr. Chriss then agreed to sit behind her for the purpose of the picture. Mr. Brinkley does not identify Mr. Chriss in the book and says that a reporter and two photographers from Look magazine arranged for the picture. He said Mrs. Parks told him she was reluctant to take part in the picture, but both the journalists and members of the civil rights community wanted an image that would dramatize what had occurred.
"It was completely a 100 percent staged event," Mr. Brinkley said. "There was nothing random about it."
But then the images and history of that era, so stark and powerful on their own, are seldom so simple. For starters, many people assume the famous picture of Mrs. Parks captures the events of Dec. 1, 1955, when she refused to give up her seat on a packed bus to a white man. Not true."
The other famous images of her, a mug shot and a picture of her being fingerprinted, don't date to Dec. 1, 1955, either. They were taken on Feb. 22, 1956, after about 100 black Montgomery residents were indicted on charges that they violated a local antiboycott statute.
"Mrs. Parks was not the first black bus rider in Montgomery to refuse to give up her seat. Two other women, Claudette Colvin and Mary Louise Smith, had done it in previous months, but Mrs. Parks's case became the one the legal challenge was based upon. The triumphant case from Montgomery that declared the city's segregated bus system illegal was not based on her case, but on that of four other plaintiffs, including Ms. Colvin and Ms. Smith."
Damn...
I had to retract my little 2 cents.
I hope this is what DMG is referring to as intelligent informative convo.
No need to sigh Big Man.
Just put on your thinking cap and take notes if you need them.
If you can set aside the sentimental conditioning to every political strategy labeled "Civil Rights" you will see this is not a simpleminded either or between Garvey or this fictitious "movement".
It is empowerment via internal development vs. empowerment via agitation and legislation.
50 years after the fact I think we should be able to assess the relative effectiveness of political strategy without brothers ... "sighing" and feigning boredom.
Big Man does the fact that the NAACP didn't have a Black President for its first 6 Decades cause you any pause?
What do you think would happen if a group of wealthy brothers formed an organization called ... um ... the Jewish Association Against Anti-Semitism (JAAAS)?
And staged little incidents of Anti-Semitic attacks. Photographed them. Picked a little Jewish girl and showed her getting mistreated by a group of white "skinheads".
Then raised millions of dollars to "defend" Jews against the evils of Anti-Semitism.
Yet, while in the process of "defending" these helpless Jewish victims of Anti-Semitism, these shrewd young brothers LEVERAGED this new political might to further an agenda that had nothing to do with Jews, and in some cases was against Jewish interest.
Do you think 50 years after the fact, Jews would be as hat-in-hand and hushed mouth regarding being played like pawns?
Big Man, people who fail to appreciate the real political mechanics of the Civil Rights "Movement" are bound to make the same mistake today.
For example:
Plantation Negros all across America are about to check "African-American" on their census form and not a black person in this country can tell you why we call ourselves that misleading label.
(I can't believe I'm on here arguing with cats about the value of self-determination. damn shame)
So Wax, Big Man and DV. Did you all catch when Ice Cube was on David Letterman, and he was asking him about his reaction to the criticism he caught over the statement made Cedric the Entertainer's character in Barber Shop?
Nah. I aint hip Gee.
What was that about?
This DV.
It was funny.
Simple. Rosa was definitely the poster child for the simple lives of black families in the south. I feel I can say this as I was born right in Alabama...
This reminds me of a short conversation between my uncle and I. One day after he found out about my college acceptance letters and scholarships (he was very proud bless his heart) he said:
"[O.Mahogany] ;) you know your aunt was one of the first black Greyhound bus drivers in the country."
LMAO. I thought you gotta be kidding me. My aunt should've owned Greyhound!! My college tuition should be funded by Greyhound revenue. Instead while many of my family members (not all) were no doubt doing some time on a plantation, a sweden immigrant moved to the states and started an 18 bus line with his partner and in less than ten years reaped annual profits of $50,000. Why the fugg (wink @DV) should I be impressed by my aunt?
As for Rosa, I truly love the woman. She really has a heart of gold. But I think there was lot of time spent on the fundamental feeling of rebellion and not enough on systematic economic goals. In the end we got a law stating it was illegal to segregate buses? Even IF IT WAS ENFORCED who cares? Rosa still took that bus to a piss ass job with the white folks. And what's worse is the woman died broke! And I LOVE Rosa ya'll!! She is the epitome of southern charm, patience and intelligence. But Southern girls are taught to be nice obedient and christian.
Why the fuck was she riding the bus anyway? We should've all had cadillacs. lol. And you don't have to be rich or too educated to know you deserve more.
Dv said:
It is empowerment via internal development vs. empowerment via agitation and legislation
Zero sum again.
You can do both. That was the problem with Civil Rights Movement, the NOI and Garvey.
Each of them, mainly because of petty bickering and huge egos, decided they didn't want to work with another group and only their way would work.
Gee Chee, tell your boy about how Malcolm wanted to go the UN and get the USA brought for its human rights violations against black folks. And that was Malcolm in his later years when he had abandoned the black/white dichotomy that Denmark claims to despise.
Malcolm was appealing to the freaking United Nations, which DV has lambasted on more than one occasion, because he recognized that on a certain level you have to use the existing structure to accomplish certain goals.
There was nothing wrong with black folks demanding that America abide by the rules laid out in its Constitution. It was only the hardness of white folks hearts, plus their guns, that made the legislation you rail against necessary.
We SHOULDN't have needed a Civil Rights Bill or Voting Rights Bill just like we shouldn't have needed the 13th and 14th amendment, but it still had to be done.
Hell, if white folks had abided by their rules of "separate but equal" black people would have been just fine with our segregated schools. The problem was that the white power structure was talking about of both sides of its mouth. The ideals it championed, were not the ideals it lived. The promises it made were not worth anything. But, hey, the Indians have more to complain about when it comes to that than black folks.
Bottom line, the NOI was sidetracked because of internal bickering combined with infiltration from the feds. It suffered because its older charismatic leader envied its younger charismatic leader. It struggled because Elijah didn't want Malcolm drawing the ire of the federal goverment by speaking up the rampant abuses of blacks in the South because Elijah didn't see them as a constituency worth risking his organization on.
I already posted the link on Garvey so you can check there for the failing of his group.
Like I have said before, any group advocating that blacks abdicate their claim to America and it's bounty in order to go back to "Africa" or establish some small enclave within America's borders is idiotic.
Any group advocating that blacks assimilate and integrate totally into American society is just as idiotic.
You refuse to acknowledge these two truths.
As for the census, I checked black. I always liked that term.
And, finally, as for my thinking cap, I don't really need it.
These are remedial courses.
I mean, seriously, what schools did y'all go to? Y'all didn't know that Rosa was handpicked because of her profile in the community?
That was a shocking revelation to y'all?
Hell I can tell you why the refused to use the other women who didn't want to give up their seats. If I'm not mistaken, one of them was a single mother or something, and the other was too outspoken. They were worried that white folks would attack their character, so they decided to have Parks get arrested for the same thing because she had a clean record.
Seriously, it's not hidden, it's in a book. And if you send your kids to the right schools, plus augment their learning with your own teachings, they'll learn this type of stuff at young age.
Next y'all are going to tell me allabout the secret orgins of the Buffalo Soldiers and the links between blacks and Native American tribes.
Oh, and DV.
Tell how the Civil Rights movement PREVENTED Garvey and the NOI from achieving their goals?
YOu ain't arguing with me about self-determination.
Stop creating straw men so you can pat yourself on the back.
Many of the cats in the Civil Rights movement knew all about self-determination. They were the cats who DIDN'T migrate to the North and allow themselves to be pushed into ghettos and slums through restrictive covenants and BS jobs.
They stayed home, built capital, acquired acres and created legacies. They didn't pay rent until they died.
Your history is faulty. Your knowledge of the participants in the Civil Rights movement is shaky. It wasn't just white folks financing the movement. There were black businessmen, men with income sources not solely dependent on white folks that were helping pay bills.
Get your mind right.
"Each of them, mainly because of petty bickering and huge egos, decided they didn't want to work with another group and only their way would work." Big Man
...
...
Really Big Man?
Really?
Each. Decided not to work with each other, huh? Because of egos?
Fascinating.
Tell me Big Man.
We know who spoke for the Universal Negro Improvement Association - Garvey.
We know who spoke for the Nation of Islam - The Honorable Elijah Muhammad.
Big Man ... WHO spoke for the "Civil Rights Movement"?
Who ... within that organization ... made the DECISION not to coordinate with the UNIA and NOI?
DV, summary from your favorite white Boy.....
"Red" Rosa Parks: Fabricating an American Icon
By Henry Makow Ph.D.
November 05, 2005
Rosa Parks was not a simple seamstress whose lonely act of defiance in 1955 sparked the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement. In fact, she was a trained Communist Party (CPUSA) activist.
Her refusal to move to the back of the bus wasn't a spontaneous gesture, but a provocation organized by her longtime employer, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).
Last week Rosa Parks' body lay in state under the Capitol Rotunda; an honor accorded only 29 times in US history, to people like Abraham Lincoln, John Kennedy, and most recently Ronald Reagan.
This treatment illustrates how the American public is routinely lied to and betrayed by its political leaders and mass media. The New York Times obituary said her arrest "turned a very private woman into a reluctant symbol and torch bearer." President Clinton said her action "ignited the most significant social movement in American history."
While I support the ostensible aims of the Civil Rights movement, I have to ask, given its Communist sponsorship, "What is the hidden agenda?" I'll elaborate later.
To understand why the US elite would honor a Communist, we need to make a paradigm shift.
A clique of London-based private bankers that controls most of the world's credit and wealth wants to consolidate this power in permanent world institutions of political, social and spiritual control.
It created and funded Communism as an instrument to advance this goal, which involves dissolving all "collective forces" that might oppose it, including nation-state, race, religion and family.
Thus "Communism" far from being a relic of the Cold war era is, in different forms, still part of our lives, eroding the above institutions.
The "Cold War" continues as the "War on Terror" -- essentially another fraud calculated to control the masses and further concentrate wealth and power in the hands of the super rich.
THE PATTERN OF ELITE DECEPTION
The portrayal of Rosa Parks as an ordinary citizen triggered my alarm bell. Betty Friedan, the "founder" of feminism and longtime Communist activist was also depicted as an average mother and housewife. Thanks to a well informed Internet forum, Daily Kos.com, I quickly discovered Rosa Parks began serving as secretary for the NAACP in 1943 and still held that position when she was arrested.
In July 1955, five months before the famous incident in December, she attended "Highlander Folk School" in Monteagle Tennessee. Myles Horton and James Dombroski, both Communist Party members, started this school in 1932 to train Communist activists. Betty Friedan was another alumnus.
Rosa Parks and many others had defied the bus segregation laws on numerous occasions since the 1940's. The Montgomery bus boycott was planned in advance. Martin Luther King was brought in to lead it. Rosa Parks was chosen to kick it off. (See Aldon Morris, "The Origins of the Civil Rights Movement")
A member of Daily Kos.com who works for the CPUSA newspaper said a CPUSA executive member told him that Rosa Parks was a member of the party. (This is something Communists don't advertise.)
The testimony of numerous defectors leaves no doubt the US Communist Party was directed from Moscow. Despite what idealistic dupes ("useful idiots") like Parks and Friedan thought, its goal is to subjugate the American people.
The Women's Liberation Movement was patterned on the Civil Rights Movement. They are off-the-shelf Communist psycho-social operations. To be effective, they must appear to reflect a popular groundswell rather than an elite agenda imposed from above.
While these movements rectified many genuine injustices, their hidden purpose is to destabilize American society by exacerbating internal divisions.
cont-
NAACP & MARTIN LUTHER KING: THE DARK SIDE
In his book, "My Awakening" David Duke paints a picture of the NAACP that suggests a typical Banker-Communist front . (pp.282-284) Although founded in 1909, it didn't have a Black President until the 1970's. Until then, its President and Board were mainly drawn from the ranks of Communist Jews.
Martin Luther King may have been a typical front man. Privately he declared himself a Marxist. He attended the Highlander School and his personal secretaries Bayard Rustin and Jack O'Dell were Communists. Stanley Levinson, his handler, who wrote his speeches and managed his fund raising, was also a Communist.
Apparently King's integrity has also been called into question. King plagiarized large sections of his Doctoral Thesis. He also had liaisons with white prostitutes, which were taped by the FBI and confirmed by his successor Ralph Abernathy. (And the Walls Came Tumbling Down, 1989)
RACIAL STRIFE AS ELITE WEAPON
I find racial prejudice, discrimination and segregation repugnant. Mankind is a family of races, each gifted and bringing something unique to the potluck.
At the same time, a balance must be found. Racial and national groups have a right to protect their racial character. I find it odd that countries like Israel, China and Japan can do this without criticism but countries in Europe and North America cannot. Blacks, Jews and Hispanics can do this but Whites cannot. I also believe discrimination in favor of a "minority" is as bad as discrimination against.
I am a Canadian and am not an expert on the Civil Rights movement. However, if the CPUSA was involved, there was a hidden agenda.
It appears to be spelled out in a document entitled "A Racial Program for the 20th Century" (1912) by a British Fabian "Israel Cohen" quoted by Congressman Thomas Abernathy during the Civil Rights debate, and entered into the Congressional Record (1957), p. 8559. If authentic, it is pretty revealing:
"We must realize that our party's most powerful weapon is racial tension. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by the whites, we can move them to the program of the Communist Party. In America we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against whites, we will instill in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negroes. We will aid the Negroes to rise to prominence in every walk of life, in the professions, and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause."
Remember, the central bankers are involved in a massive fraud: printing our money for the price of the paper, loaning it to us and then demanding repayment with interest. The only way they can perpetuate this fraud is to distract us until they can enshackle us. That involves creating enemies.
Look at France with its minority of five million Muslims. Currently Muslim youth are rioting. French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy said Thursday that the riots were "not spontaneous" but rather "well organized." Do I need to elaborate? The central bankers use racial minorities as a weapon.
A final suggestion is that, given the heavily Jewish character of the Communist Party, the Civil Rights Movement may have been designed to tear down White racial defences so that sympathetic Jews might advance.
CONCLUSION
The sanctification of the Communist Rosa Parks proves again that the American political and cultural elite is irredeemably corrupt.
Social change doesn't take place in the USA unless the central bankers and their media assets sponsor it. Their long-term plan for world dictatorship is disguised as spontaneous grassroots revolt.
Increasingly the mass media, government and education reveal their true colors, and discredit themselves in the eyes of the public.
"There was nothing wrong with black folks demanding that America abide by the rules laid out in its Constitution."
Of course not Big Man.
On paper anyway.
But black folks weren't doing the planning.
Just the marching.
Just the getting lynched.
Just the getting spat on.
Just the getting shot.
School integration did nothing but integrate poor black kids with poor white kids and teach them both the same sanitized HIStory and the bogus Food Pyramid.
"I find racial prejudice, discrimination and segregation repugnant. Mankind is a family of races, each gifted and bringing something unique to the potluck.
At the same time, a balance must be found. Racial and national groups have a right to protect their racial character. I find it odd that countries like Israel, China and Japan can do this without criticism but countries in Europe and North America cannot. Blacks, Jews and Hispanics can do this but Whites cannot. I also believe discrimination in favor of a "minority" is as bad as discrimination against."
I have a hard time arguing with that Wax.
DV is absolutely, positively, my favorite nigger of all time.
ATLAH!!!
Apparently, MB, the "Civil Rights Movement" ... was entertainment too.—DV
Entertainment!!!!!! Tell that to the families of: George Lee, Lamar Smith, John Earl Reese, Herbert Lee, Roman Ducksworth, Medgar Evers, Addie Mae Collins, Denise McNair, Carole Robertson, Cynthia Wesley, Virgil Ware, Louis Allen, Henry Dee, Charles Moore, Mickey Schwerner, Andrew Goodman, James Earl Chaney, Jimmie Lee Jackson, James Reeb, Viola Liuzzo, Oneal Moore, Jonathan Daniels, Sammy Younge, Jr., Vernon Dahmer, Benjamin Brown, Samuel Hammond, Delano Middleton, and Henry Smith.
They were killed with real bombs and bullets.
Brah man, you been watching too many videos with asinine negroes shooting each other with fake choppers.
To Hell With A Civil Rights Act.—DV
Just wondering brah man, do you feel the same way about the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution? If so, I’m sure Nathan Bedford Forrest will rise from the grave and support you on that one.
Why the fuck was she riding the bus anyway? We should've all had cadillacs. - Mahogany
Mahogany, please advise. What was the median income of Afrikan Americans in Alabama in 1955?
"Malcolm was appealing to the freaking United Nations, " Big Man
To do what?
No.
Really.
What could the United Nations ... ever ... possibly ... do for black people?
I'm curious.
What is the perceived benefit of a successful "appeal" to the United Nations?
I want to know.
What that looks like.
A "Proclamation"?
A "Declaration"?
A "Resolution" like the Palestinians ask for to protect them from the Israelis?
Legislation is nothing but paper.
Here's a thought. It was an attempt to shame the US government, do create incredibly bad PR for it internationally, thus opening the door for other countries who needed an opening to deal differently with the US to do so, which, in turn, could have put pressure on the U.S. to change their policies internationally and internally toward the non-white majority of the world. Let's also not forget that Malcolm was making trips to African nations, making alliances...he was essentially reviving Garvey's Pan-Africanism, but in a way that could have proved to be a true power-bloc to offset the influence of the U.S. and their Bizarro Doppelganger, the U.S.S.R. Who knows if it woulda worked out. Instead, Malcolm was assassinated, Nasir was assassinated, and so it goes.
Mahogany, please advise. What was the median income of Afrikan Americans in Alabama in 1955? - Makheru
@Makheru It's probably best to look up those things according to city as opposed to the state. You're welcome to look up bureau records circa 1955.
But as of the year 2000 the median income of a family in Montgomery, Al is $35,500+ which is exactly my point.
Now on the flip side there were
women like my grandmother owning their own establishments. I particularly cite A.G. Gaston
as he was a very prominent black businessman in my hometown of Birmingham and was very vocal about Civil Rights. In fact he admonished Dr. King for recruiting school children to join in protests.
Mr. Gaston left behind his insurance company and a construction firm. He died with a net worth of a couple mill. I'm being modest.
On another note- I went to this bomb party one of the Gaston kids threw. Like an episode of sweet 16.
"It was an attempt to shame the US government, do create incredibly bad PR for it internationally, thus opening the door for other countries who needed an opening to deal differently with the US to do so, which, in turn, could have put pressure on the U.S. to change their policies internationally and internally toward the non-white majority of the world." Cadeveo
OK.
OK.
I can see that.
But let's think that through.
The tricky part of the Civil Rights propaganda that was laid on us, was the implication that black people were completely helpless, incapacitated and universally thwarted by whites in each and every possible endeavor.
The history of black Americans after the turn of the century is depicted as one consumed by CONSTANT race tension and oppression.
The way the story is told now, it's hard to imagine we ever had time to invent jazz, conquer the boxing ring, operate the Theresa hotel make money in the numbers rackets, own night clubs, practice law, get married, make babies, go to war, create an uptown renaissance and steel home plate.
As one listens to these modern day brothers project the flickering black and white images of their never ending Februaries (black history month) ... of incessant Negro ineffectiveness ... one realizes the dangerous mind fuck that goes along with completely buying into the Civil Rights paradigm.
At a core level one must buy into the suggestion that black people COULDN'T DO IT WITHOUT THE GOVERNMENT.
Look at the sorry ass look on the face of the Negro boy who can't afford to go to college in the above video.
That's the attitude and pose of the typical Civil Rights negro.
The implicit message of the Propaganda Campaign we call "the Civil Rights" movement was ...
DON'T BOTHER TO CAST YOUR BUCKETS
BECAUSE YOUR BUCKETS ARE SMALLER THAN WHITE FOLKS BUCKETS.
DEMAND THE GOVERNMENT MAKE WHITE PEOPLE'S BUCKETS AND BLACK PEOPLE'S BUCKETS THE SAME SIZE!
UNTIL OUR BUCKETS ARE THE SAME SIZE WE SHALL NOT BE FREE!
Man fuck that.
You what lasting wealth we could have built instead of chasing the fantasy that anyone EVER gives away power?
First, O. Mahogany is my new best friend. Seriously. She should come over for dinner. The whole idea that we should be proud as the 'first low-paid employee' for any job in insane. I'm waiting for a black enterprise where a white person is proud to be the first white employee. Nevah gonna happen. LOL
And about fluctuating bucket sizes:
If your bucket is half the size of the next fellah, then cast yours at twice the frequency!
I know a black man who leads a Millionaire's club. He teaches the fine art of investing for wealth. His helpful instruction is the reason my Roth IRA produces dividends... We sat at lunch one day, and we laughed about an email group he belongs to. At times, somebody in the email group will circulate a racist joke. Why? Because the whites in the group could never imagine that one of their affluent members was a black man. He's smart enough to let it pass instead of pounding his chest about it (and promptly losing his standing among a pool of useful information).
As an older black male, he never waited a day for the government to "level the playing field." While the government should have a role in ensuring our general protections, we have a much larger role in determining how we learn, create, and prosper - from our finances to our health.
Programs, such as welfare, intended to 'right economic wrongs' have dire consequences - creating valleys from which people find it almost impossible to climb.
Before I start rambling: I agree that the smoke screen of "race relations" keeps poor folks bickering over issues of respect instead of actively pursuing real economic remedies. I couldn't care less if you called me a n!gger, so long as you pump my gas and keep it moving.
"The whole idea that we should be proud as the 'first low-paid employee' for any job in insane. I'm waiting for a black enterprise where a white person is proud to be the first white employee. Nevah gonna happen. LOL"
Hell. I love both of ya'll.
Good to know sisters out there thinking like this.
When I was little boy Mr. Charles up the street used to tell us he was "the first Black Sky Cap at LaGuardia airport!"
Yeahhhhh ... ok Mr. Chales.
I don't mean no harm. There was a time black people weren't hired at LaGuardia.
Skycap was a nice paying job in the 50's.
But you don't hear about the First Mexican leaf blower in Brentwood.
Or the first Chinese delivery boy in Soho.
The entire Civil Rights narrative seems to have been built upon the story of the mistreated Negro ... asking not for a Handout ... just a hand... and being ALLOWED to work for somebody else or to get into somebody's school who didn't really want him there.
That's not a very empowering self-image. In fact, it is crippling.
People tend to act out what is modeled for them.
That's why I bringing attention to whom it was who actually wrote these Negro Narratives of the NAACP.
Who are the scriptwriters for the United Negro College Fund?
What is there agenda?
Are we the authors of today's "African American" political paradigm or are we still being managed in 2010 like Rosa Parks was managed in 1955?
Maybe I didn't make this clear enough up top.
Malcolm, whose ideas and practices have been championed on several threads by our host and others, SAW THE VALUE OF APPEALING TO EXISTING STRUCTURES FOR REDRESS. That's why he went to the United Nations.
So, if the man who has been held up as a visionary prophet could see the value of this practice, particularly after he GAVE UP the black/white paradigm that Mr. Vesey has called so passe, then why pratell does our host continue to push the ridiculous meme that legislation has no value.
That's absurd. I guarantee that when DV consults with a client, he has them sign a contract. That's just paper.
When he married his wife, he got a marriage certificate, just paper.
When he goes to the damn store, he used cash money, again, just paper.
Paper has value when people its backed by communally shared ideas. The plan was to force the United States to adhere to the values its citizens were supposed to hold, and to use paper to do that.
We clear now?
Furthermore,
it's incredibly ignorant and misguided to distill the entire Civil Rights movement into "black folks marching and getting spat on."
That's like calling Ida Wells campaign against lynching just another black chick complaining.
At its core, the Civil Rights movement was about forcing white folks to recognize the inalienable human rights of black people in America.
Typically, gain power you use force. Unfortunately, black folks lacked the ability, due to their tiny numbers and even smaller power base, to use force to accomplish their goals. Therefore, they went another route.
The goal of the Civil Rights movement, at least as I have always understood it, was not to "integrate" or "assimilate."
It was for black folks to be accorded the rights, privileges and opportunities they deserved as American citizens, born and raised in this country, and supporting it with their labor and money.
Now, the movement failed in certain respects, as many movements do, because it was being run by human beings who had their own human failings. But, let their be no mistake about the goals.
Oh yeah. There was no singular "leader" of the Civil Rights movement, mainly because the movement was operating on several different levels in society.
You had your preachers and speakers raising funds on the speaking circuit and leading marches. You had college kids risking their lives to register voters and forcibly desegregate public and private facilities.
You had lawyers working in the courtrooms and in the government. You had businessman supporting those in need behind the scenes and trying to create viable enterprises moving forward.
They didn't need a "leader." Didn't need one, and didn't want one. Hell, many folks used to get pissed that MLK was held up as the spokesman for all black folks, and he openly chaffed at the media's insistence on placing him in that role.
Another point
Holding up Elijah Muhammed as the "leader" of a "powerful" NOI is a tad bit dishonest.
Before Malcolm, the NOI was a regional organization with small branches in a few cities, but had zero national profile and was not involved in the lives of many black folks at all.
After Malcolm converted, he thrust the NOI into the national consciousness, he gave it a vision and drive. He moved it from a marginalized religious cult that had the feel of an extortion racket, to a national organization that spoke to the feelings of many of black folks who were interested in allowing white people to spit on them in order to get their rights.
Malcolm was the one agitating for the Nation to be more active in the lives of black folks. Elijah was the one who wanted to concentrate on accumulating wealth and capital, with that wealth consolidated in the hands of his family.
Malcolm was the one actually living by the moral code the NOI stressed to its members, Elijah and his children most certainly were not.
When Malcolm split from the NOI, you gradually saw the group once again return to its former stature, with a brief resurgence at the hands of Farrakhan.
Consequently, it's arguable about who was the "leader" of the NOI at the heart of the civil rights movement. Which would have made it difficult for any group to coordinate with them.
Would a leader silence Malcolm for telling white folks that the assasination of JFK was the result of the evil America had practiced on people all across the world?
If that's the "leader" where is he leading?
On the UNIA, by the apex of the Civil Rights movement, the UNIA also had lost it national profile after the death of its charismatic leader.
Besides, you have given Garvey a lot of credit for creating ideas that he did not in fact create. I'm not taking away from the power of his plan, just noting that what he was advocating for was not new.
He took the economic and worker-based ideas of folks like Washingtong and Randolph, combined it with religious undertones of Haili Selassie and sprinkled that with the appeals to black pride first pioneered by Carter G. Woodson and also used the Pan African thoughts of cats like Prince Hall.
It was a powerful and timely message for black folks, but ultimately his movement was not unique, nor was it built for the long haul.
After his death in 1940, what happened to UNIA? How would you propose that the folks in the Civil Rights movement link up with somethat truly no longer existed?
"Malcolm, whose ideas and practices have been championed on several threads by our host and others, SAW THE VALUE OF APPEALING TO EXISTING STRUCTURES FOR REDRESS. That's why he went to the United Nations." Big Man.
OK.
Malcolm saw them.
I don't.
Why don't you share that value with us?
______________________________ ?
"why pratell does our host continue to push the ridiculous meme that legislation has no value." Big Man
Because new legislation can be passed to thwart the old legislation.
...
...
...
Big Man how does the Patriot Act effect the Civil Rights Act?
How is the "Civil Rights Act" impacted by 3 Strikes You're Out laws?
How many black people were in prison before the Voting Rights Act?
How many black people in prison today?
How many black people had diabetes before "The National Health Insurance Bill / Whatever"?
How many black people have diabetes after it was passed?
Get it yet Big Man?
You with me?
Black folks keep trying to get another "EEE Man Suuuh Payshun Pwoc Lo Mashun".
It's been 250 years. Let it go.
We don't need more paper laws passed by bullshit politicians.
We need black people who know how to eat.
We need black people who recognize they are not exercising their political will.
It's time to move on.
"Before Malcolm, the NOI was a regional organization with small branches in a few cities, but had zero national profile and was not involved in the lives of many black folks at all." Big Man
Brother Big Man, that's a pretty undeveloped view of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad.
I encourage you to look a little deeper.
DV
So, on one hand you discount the power of legislation....
And to buttress that point, you reference the Patriot Act....
Which is a form of legislation...
And, you don't see the problem with this logic at all?
Legislation is powerless, unless it's taking away our rights, then it's powerful and evil.
How about, legislation, like most things in our civilized and specialized society, is based on a tacit agreement between human beings to uphold the agreed upon rules of society.
Like money. Like "inalienable rights."
There are no "inalienable rights."
You only have the rights you have the might to protect for yourself. That's simple logic you learn on the playground after your first fight.
But, while that may be the simple fact, the more complex truth is that when humans gather in large numbers we make compromised to prevent wholesale slaughter and conflict on a daily basis. Those compromises or our laws, and unless you possess the ability to survive and prosper while ignoring the laws of the land (which most black folks don't in America) then you need to learn how to use the system in place.
One more time Big Man:
A people who predicate their freedom and rights upon legislation will always be in danger of losing their rights and freedom by new legislation.
Come on now man.
We've covered this already.
Peep the archives for "unalienable" rights.
The elevation of "Civil Rights" to our number 1 Group Strategy priority has not been proven wise by history.
Propaganda was used to SELL black people on the all empowering twins of Civil Rights and 'Higher' Education.
50 years later we have a nation of college educated people about to get laid off and dependent upon a weak government to manage their health. No equity in their homes, and fewer spiritual resources as they have been systematically secularized.
Garvey was on point.
Elijah Muhammad was right.
The Civil Rights Negros, financed by "others", poisoned their legacies.
Why?
It was a clever way to divide conquer and eliminate the competition.
DV said:
A people who predicate their freedom and rights upon legislation will always be in danger of losing their rights and freedom by new legislation.
What are your freedoms and rights predicated upon in the United States of America?
DV said:
The elevation of "Civil Rights" to our number 1 Group Strategy priority has not been proven wise by history.
Propaganda was used to SELL black people on the all empowering twins of Civil Rights and 'Higher' Education.
50 years later we have a nation of college educated people about to get laid off and dependent upon a weak government to manage their health. No equity in their homes, and fewer spiritual resources as they have been systematically secularized
Nobody had to "sell" black folks the meme of higher education or civil rights.
Civil Rights are human rights. Education is key to improving your lot in the world.
Honestly, conspicuous consumption has far more to do with the poor state of black folks finances and health than the United Negro College Fund or Medicaid. But, I know, you ain't trying to hear that.
DV said:
Garvey was on point.
Elijah Muhammad was right.
The Civil Rights Negros, financed by "others", poisoned their legacies.
Why?
It was a clever way to divide conquer and eliminate the competition.
It's a damn shame when a man is willfully ignorant of reality.
Nobody "poisoned" the legacies of Garvey or Elijah.
You need to stop hanging out with dumb Negroes if you think their legacy has been poisoned.
Malcolm was very charismatic, articulate, witty everything. I love Malcolm. Malcolm was a tremendous asset to the Nation. He was improvisational and a motivator. He worked day and night for the Nation and died penniless.
Malcolm was not able to do this without the support system of the Nation. When he left he did not start a new Nation. One thing Robert F. Williams pointed out was that these movements taking place all over the US was embarrassing to the country. It was a great embarrassment when Williams reported the treatment of a 9 year old black boy to the rest of the world. Just behind that gesture alone they tried to set Williams up.
International relations was very important. Just like the strategy to have Obama kowtow across the map to rebuild relations. Malcolm would have been embarrassing (I believe, I dont know) the US and their foreign policy more than any real political stratagem. However, Dr. YN Kly has done extensive work on the issue of human rights and being recognized as holocaust victims. Something that is obviously more radical than the Civil Rights movement and the beginning of relationships with the international community.
But it as for the break through for the Nation was Mike Wallace piece 'The Hate that Hate Produced'. It is so fascinating that during that era black people were still generally thought of as inferior unable to govern themselves. Even amongst the liberal whites they were more aggressive in taking charge of an organization. This is partially why Stokely became more "radical" with SNCC eventually leaving.
So when Negroes start getting on national television with the platform to blast their opponents, we were creating new imagery. Powerful imagery. Huey took advantage of the media when the Panthers became popular because of their protest with firearms outside the Capital building in Sacramento. Newton intended on being arrested, but his whole plan was to use the media to redefine what being a thug and hoodlum was. They called themselves an "armed propaganda unit."
Big Man you pulling a "DMG" on me.
So eager to prove DV wrong you are completely missing the point.
We are having a conversation, not a contest. We are just comparing ideas. Examining the observable.
Don't be so defensive.
"What are your freedoms and rights predicated upon in the United States of America?" Big Man
My freedom and rights are predicated upon the same thing in the United States as they would be predicated upon anywhere in the world.
My freedom and my rights are God given. Inalienable.
I believe, Big Man, "asking" other men to essentially give me my "freedom" or my "rights" also puts them in a position to take them away from me.
Do you understand that?
I don't care if you disagree, but we've been over this, and each time you post I get the impression you are not factoring this into your analysis.
Now.
With that out of the way ... It is my contention that the architects and financiers of the "Civil Rights" strategy led us into a booby trap.
The Brothers like MLK and Ralph Abernathy who served as the face of the movement were well intentioned noble and even great men.
But they got played.
"
Nobody "poisoned" the legacies of Garvey or Elijah." Big Man
"Another point. Holding up Elijah Muhammed as the "leader" of a "powerful" NOI is a tad bit dishonest." Big Man
Case.
In.
Point.
We do see that the United Nations is a joke. A whole lot has changed since then. The Panthers use to get up in court and defend themselves. Law has changed dramatically since then. That can't happen today, according to this lawyer I know who became a lawyer in the 70's to help his people.
It is a media battle. Image battle. 'The Hate that Hate Produced"? That piece was basically shouting out to white America, "Can you believe what these Negroes are believing about us? After all we've done for them." It was a HUGE shock. These narratives are so out of perspective. So the Nation spread like wild fire as Malcolm continued to get media coverage. No you cannot make a person who they are, but the conduit for expressing those ides have to be present. The church would have frozen Malcolm out with his fiery speeches. They had trouble with Martin at first.
Today they are not repeating that mistake. That is why rap filled that gap of the absence of the unrepresented voice. That's why Chuck made that statement about rap being the black CNN. It was in the context of being able to say whatever we wanted to say without being censored. I would like to ask Chuck if he still stands by that quote today, in light of all that has taken place since it has become very corporate.
"Gee-Chee said...
Today they are not repeating that mistake. That is why rap filled that gap of the absence of the unrepresented voice. "
Gaaaaat Daaaaamn
THANK YOU
Where ya'll cats been the past 3 years.
Thank God for some imaginative thinking.
These squares had me surrounded.
@DV,
"My freedom and my rights are God given. Inalienable."
Did you mean Unalienable?
UNALIENABLE vs INALIENABLE.
Mega trick here DV. Remember that I talked about Saturnia Vatican Law (UCC) better know as Common or Civil or Maritime or Admiralty Law.
They use the term "Inalienable Rights" which can be sold and transferred from a corporate standpoint. Your rights.
Check this:
Unalienable-
The state of a thing or right which cannot be sold.
Things which are not in commerce, as public roads, are in their nature unalienable. Some things are unalienable, in consequence of particular provisions in the law forbidding their sale or transfer, as pensions granted by the government. The natural rights of life and liberty are UNALIENABLE. Bouviers Law Dictionary 1856 Edition
"Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred." Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523:
You can not surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights, they are a gift from the creator to the individual and can not under any circumstances be surrendered or taken. All individual's have unalienable rights.
Now this:
Inalienable rights: Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights. Morrison v. State, Mo. App., 252 S.W.2d 97, 101.
You can surrender, sell or transfer inalienable rights if you consent either actually or constructively. Inalienable rights are not inherent in man and can be alienated by government. Persons have inalienable rights. Most state constitutions recognize only inalienable rights.
DV, I keep on trying to direct traffic back to UCC from I have been here because it makes a lot of the conversations moot. In regards to Big Man's "civil rights" and UCC -"Civil" means from the Gov. which is like fighting over what color do you want the bars to be in prison. Zero to do with Freedom.
With UCC the term Liberty?
Haa!
The International Monetary System based on an occult UCC Uniform Commercial Code of Vatican Law, the umbrella code... the word code meaning encrypted.
Interesting about the Statue of Liberty (vs Statue of Freedom) having to be placed in water, as in maritime law... Liberty is a "pass", given to you, granted in the Admiralty World... Anything given to you or granted, can be taken away. Check that-who wants liberty?
Subtle use of the language that we don't realize DV... ex: american civil liberties union (not rights) "civil" comes from govts. Religions & politics work hand in hand.
Religions & religious thinking/ideologies is the basis for war throughout history.... and all the major religions can be traced back to the planet Saturn/Saturnalia (worth studying).
Thank You Wax Thank You.
Unalienable Rights!
Brother you should be teaching a mandatory class.
I hope Big Man reads your post carefully.
Imagine a nation of Black Men affirming their Unalienable Rights.
Great idea DV!
OK get the kids....
A little known fact that is missed in all this is the "law of contracts". There are many "types" of law, (ie. corporate law, tax law, international law, etc. etc. etc.) and the two types pertinent to us are Constitutional Law (common law or lawful) and Civil Law (private or legal).
Both of these fall under the "Law of Contracts" (in latin: pacta sunt servanda, ie: pacts must be kept.) and the above mentioned "types" of law fall under Civil Law.
The Constitutions of the land are lawful contracts between the people of the land and and those elected (State and Federal) to protect their rights enumerated in 1st: each States own Bill of Rights and 2nd: the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Conststitution.
Only people can claim constitutional rights. States can't claim constitutional rights. Every agreement entered into by the states with the federal govt. falls under civil or contractual law. The actual laws that the states and fedral govt. operate under doing day to day business internally and with each other fall under contractual law and not common law.
The state an federal govts. are "legal entities", not "lawful entities", such as a human being is under common law.
NOW COMES THE BOMBSHELL! 99% of U.S. citizens are no longer subject to constitutional common law because of contracts entered into with both state and federal govts. and therefore have no const. rights placing themselves under civil law jurisdiction rather than common law jurisdiction.
Think I'm wrong. That drivers license in your wallet is a contract with the state. You no longer have a right to drive, it is a privelege granted by the state subject to civil law. That social security number is a contract between you and the federal govt. taking you from common law status to civil law status. File a tax return? The reason you must is because you became a "legal entity" with your S.S. number. File your name with the military draft board when you were 18? The reason you must is because as a "legal entity" you are subject to the rules and regulations of the United States of America pursuant to U.S. Code Title etc.
Ever collected unemployment? Welfare? These contracts are seemingly endless. And every one of them supersedes any constitutional rights you think you have. That holds true for state as well as federal.
And that is the crux....."constitutional rights you THINK you have." The State and Federal governments have comitted the biggest act of fraud imaginable on the people of America and the great majority don't even know it.
don't even know it.
don't even know it.
don't even know it.:)
Lesson 2 DV ? :)
Marriage Licenses: The Real Truth
it is very important to understand that children born to the marriage are considered by law as "the contract bearing fruit" - meaning the children primarily belong to the State, even though the law never comes out and says so in so many words.
In this regard, children born to the contract regarded as "the contract bearing fruit," he said it is vitally important for parents to understand two doctrines that became established in the United States during the 1930s. The first is the Doctrine of Parens Patriae. The second is the Doctrine of In Loco Parentis. Parens Patriae means literally "the parent of the country" or to state it more bluntly - the State is the undisclosed true parent. Along this line, a 1930s Arizona Supreme Court case states that parents have no property right in their children, and have custody of their children during good behavior at the sufferance of the State. This means that parents may raise their children and maintain custody of their children as long as they don't offend the State, but if they in some manner displease the State, the State can step in at any time and exercise its superior status and take custody and control of its children - the parents are only conditional caretakers. [Thus the Doctrine of In Loco Parentis.]
They also added a few more technical details. The marriage license is an ongoing contractual relationship with the State. Technically, the marriage license is a business license allowing the husband and wife, in the name of the marriage, to enter into contracts with third parties and contract mortgages and debts. They can get car loans, home mortgages, and installment debts in the name of the marriage because it is not only a secular enterprise, but it is looked upon by the State as a privileged business enterprise as well as a for-profit business enterprise. The marriage contract acquires property through out its existence and over time, it is hoped, increases in value.
But you don't hear me though!!!:)
DV -tell me when to stop exposing the Saturnalia Con man.
Don't start none, won't be none. You know from my Common law/Admiralty law studies I could spend all night exposing the con we call law. Like I said before: The deceiver knows what the hell he is doing.
LOL.
Get 'em Wax!
But let's be real.
What you are talking about is waaaay too heavy for most folks.
What you are talking about is so far off the Plantation that ... although it is all independently verifiable ... most people would rather not deal with it.
Other than the Gee Chees and Kay Dubs of this world most brothers and sisters are too anti-intellectual and extremely uncomfortable with that level of freedom.
Hot Wax
Inalienable:
impossible to take away: not able to be transferred or taken away, e.g. because of being protected by law
I said my rights are God given. Granted by God's law.
What is the only "right" that God granted to all of mankind?
I don't need to breakdown the definition of inalienable versus unalienable.
The only right I'm guaranteed by virtue of my humanity is the one granted to me by my creator.
Now, you tell me what that right is.
As for the con we call "law" I have one comment.
WHY IS THIS NEWS TO Y'ALL?
I'm totally serious. Cats are 50 years old just figuring out that the "law" is a group of rules designed to benefit a particular group while providing control for another?
Son, I ain't even 30 yet I've known that for damn near a decade. No, seriously, I have known that for damn near a decade.
I tell ya, some of y'all must have been sleepwalking. For real.
"Son, I ain't even 30 yet I've known that for damn near a decade. No, seriously, I have known that for damn near a decade."
Yeah Big Man.
You know.
But you don't understand.
Knowledge is overrated.
Ain't that the truth.
Which is why I'm focused on wisdom.
You the one big-upping "knowledge" with random exposes supported by extensive cut and pastes.
Like I said, y'all cat's thinking y'all discovered the wheel, but mofos been driving for centuries.
Post a Comment