I think Belafonte misunderstood the point that Farrakhan was making about this. I think Belafonte thought Farrakhan was saying we should give up on America and stop voting or move out or some such consequence. Perhaps "Mr. B." felt Farrakhan was inferring some of the more "dramatic" courses of action that the Nation has supported in the past - armed insurrection, etc. Who knows? I think the minister meant that, as it is constructed now, our government and society are not going to be things that we can passively rely upon for our liberation.
I would venture to say that Belafonte agrees.
To be honest, I was left confused by the comments. I found real consistency between Belafonte's earlier remarks about "revolution" and "rebellion", and Farrakhan's reference to the burning house. Perhaps the comments had more to do with some broader or deeper interest/need in creating distance between he and Farrakhan than any substantive differences.
I could be very wrong, but Belafonte's comments seemed more driven out of ego (or some other emotional need) than out of real substance. Farrakhan came on strong and as usual was beautifully eloquent. Maybe B felt F stole the show and in his absence (Farrakhan had to leave early) he wanted to get in the last word or whatever? Again, I don't see much difference between them - at least in what I heard yesterday.
What did you think?