All I have to say (with the notable exception(s))... IT MUST REALLY BE LONELY OUT THERE.


quote:
Though many on the site dislike conservatives, I still believe the best of them especially the Nationalist of them should be celebrated.

First, my favorite
Marcus Garvey, the creator and leader of what is the largest Black movement in history, the UNIA. Also a great contributor to Blacks shedding the negativity we associated with being Black.

Zora Neal Hurston, a great writer who promoted folksy Black American style writing much to the chagrin of Negros who wanted to assimilate and thus worried about whites looking down on southern Black speech patterns

Alexander Crummel, one of the proponent of Black nationalism and repatriation, pre dating Garvey by decades. Accumulated great power within the Episcopalian/Anglican Church and helped Liberia's formative government.

Martin Delaney, who I will name my first born after. Spoke of Black accomplishment when whites and Dubiousian Negros promoted our ancestors as barbarians. Also an original thinker in the repatriation and Nationalist movement.

http://www.afrochat.net/politics-activism/15991-great-black-conservatives.html
Original Post
That list certainly would have to include David Walker, author of 'The Appeal'.

And the classic revolutionaries Denmark Vesey, Nat Turner, and Gabriel Prosser...

And, of course, Thomas Morris Chester...

The issue for all of these people seems to have been freedom rather than (simply) conservatism...,or liberalism.

PEACE

Jim Chester
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:

That list certainly would have to include David Walker, author of 'The Appeal'.

And the classic revolutionaries Denmark Vesey, Nat Turner, and Gabriel Prosser...

And, of course, Thomas Morris Chester...

The issue for all of these people seems to have been freedom rather than (simply) conservatism...,or liberalism.

PEACE

Jim Chester


Those folks had nothing to do with conservatism - which, at its core, is about preserving the institutions of the past. They ALL represent CHANGE - some at the end of a rifle.

Black conservatives are so freakin' desperate! 18
Those folks had nothing to do with conservatism - which, at its core, is about preserving the institutions of the past. They ALL represent CHANGE - some at the end of a rifle.

Black conservatives are so freakin' desperate! 18---MBM

Precisely my point.

I'm assuming you are referring to those in the original list as well.

I cannot disagree with your comment about 'black conservatives'.

I never been clear on that definition as is true for me with the terminology 'black'.

I always have to examine the context of the statement contain 'black' to try to figure just who and what the writer is trying to reference.

Unlike the common question 'You know what I mean?'...I frequently don't.


PEACE

Jim Chester
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:

That list certainly would have to include David Walker, author of 'The Appeal'.

And the classic revolutionaries Denmark Vesey, Nat Turner, and Gabriel Prosser...

And, of course, Thomas Morris Chester...

The issue for all of these people seems to have been freedom rather than (simply) conservatism...,or liberalism.

PEACE

Jim Chester


Those folks had nothing to do with conservatism - which, at its core, is about preserving the institutions of the past. They ALL represent CHANGE - some at the end of a rifle.

Black conservatives are so freakin' desperate! 18


Well Zora would fit that description perfectly, she was a member of the old Right, a constitualist. Marcus Garvey did seek to preserve things, he said as much in many of his writings. He simply wanted to preserve African Traditions. Crummell would certainly be a Negro conservative and likely would like to preserve western tradition in Africa(his heel IMHO), Delaney adapted many African traditions after touring West Africa, I need to read more on it, but I imagine he wanted to preserve their traditions. In any event these people were trying to maintain the idea of Blacks in the West as a separate people, while radical in America it's not radical from a Black perspective your preserving your culture, race and way of life in instead of integrated ( which would be the progressive act).
I can agree these folks are not strict conservatives but were certainly Black conservatives as they were right of center, anti communism in most cases,and Zora, who follow B.Washington(generally credited as being the father of Black conservatisms, obviously I disagree) and Garvey, was anti Brown vs Education. They were also certainly opposite of those involved in the Harlem Renaissance, W.E.B, Paine, and Douglas, who were ardent intergrationist and WEB a communist.
quote:
Originally posted by Nmaginate:
All I have to say (with the notable exception(s))... IT MUST REALLY BE LONELY OUT THERE.


quote:
Though many on the site dislike conservatives, I still believe the best of them especially the Nationalist of them should be celebrated.

First, my favorite
Marcus Garvey, the creator and leader of what is the largest Black movement in history, the UNIA. Also a great contributor to Blacks shedding the negativity we associated with being Black.

Zora Neal Hurston, a great writer who promoted folksy Black American style writing much to the chagrin of Negros who wanted to assimilate and thus worried about whites looking down on southern Black speech patterns

Alexander Crummel, one of the proponent of Black nationalism and repatriation, pre dating Garvey by decades. Accumulated great power within the Episcopalian/Anglican Church and helped Liberia's formative government.

Martin Delaney, who I will name my first born after. Spoke of Black accomplishment when whites and Dubiousian Negros promoted our ancestors as barbarians. Also an original thinker in the repatriation and Nationalist movement.

http://www.afrochat.net/politics-activism/15991-great-black-conservatives.html


I didn't read much of the article. It seems your confusing what we call conservatism now and what was/really is. The mention of George Bush implies that. It is also doesn't take into account the fact some Blacks did have their own way of life and institutions(however informal they have been, and in many cases extremely negative) and did seek to preserve them.
quote:
Originally posted by Nmaginate:
All I have to say (with the notable exception(s))... IT MUST REALLY BE LONELY OUT THERE.


quote:
Though many on the site dislike conservatives, I still believe the best of them especially the Nationalist of them should be celebrated.

First, my favorite
Marcus Garvey, the creator and leader of what is the largest Black movement in history, the UNIA. Also a great contributor to Blacks shedding the negativity we associated with being Black.

Zora Neal Hurston, a great writer who promoted folksy Black American style writing much to the chagrin of Negros who wanted to assimilate and thus worried about whites looking down on southern Black speech patterns

Alexander Crummel, one of the proponent of Black nationalism and repatriation, pre dating Garvey by decades. Accumulated great power within the Episcopalian/Anglican Church and helped Liberia's formative government.

Martin Delaney, who I will name my first born after. Spoke of Black accomplishment when whites and Dubiousian Negros promoted our ancestors as barbarians. Also an original thinker in the repatriation and Nationalist movement.

http://www.afrochat.net/politics-activism/15991-great-black-conservatives.html




NMan, next time you use a post of mine from another forum throw your boy a heads up. I don't mind, but would like to be forewarned.
It is a very lonely existence, I'm not a Black conservative like the sycophants who mold themselves as such today, actually I am not a social or religious conservative, at all and I'm not an intergrationist which leaves me with even fewer allies, so its indeed a lonely and disheartening world for someone like me,someone who political ideals will never even reach reality in compromise. I used to argue for them, now I might go back and forth for a little but have lost passion , shamefully though I still hold these views, I'm almost a broken man, my youth is the only thing that keeps me hopeful .
quote:
NMan, next time you use a post of mine from another forum throw your boy a heads up.

You're right, A-Sax. I was wrong for that. I should have asked your permission or, as you said, gave you a heads up.


quote:
I'm not a Black conservative like the sycophants.... I am not a social or religious conservative, at all and I'm not an intergrationist which leaves me with even fewer allies, so its indeed a lonely and disheartening world for someone like me,someone who political ideals will never even reach reality in compromise.... I'm almost a broken man...

Maybe you could explain the title of your Afro-Chat thread: Great Black Conservatives. And what views of yours are you talking about? As far as Nationalism is concerned (and Pan-Africanism), you're in the same boat as a lot of people, including myself. I just find it odd that you or anybody would tag those listed (with the notable exception... of Zora, of course; not sure about Crummel) as Black Conservatives espectially when, for Garvey and Delaney, e.g., your very description highlights something other than their "conservativism."

And, no, no one is going to disregard your lead-in statement:

"Though many on the site dislike conservatives...."

I never heard of such dislike of Garvey, Delaney or even Hurston or Crummel (though a number of people may take issue with some of the things they said/did).


quote:
It seems your confusing what we call conservatism now and what was/really is.

I, for one, have confused nothing. It's obvious you had an issue with confusing the rejection of today's political Black CONservatives with feelings about conservative idea(l)s altogether. You made no distinction between "what we call conservatism now" and what it "really" is and, in fact, intentionally tried to associate today's Black CONservatives with those named. That's the function of your lead-in statement especially in the absence of any distinction from you between past and present conservativism.
quote:
I can agree these folks are not strict conservatives but were certainly Black conservatives as they were right of center

Right of what "center." That theory of yours neither holds in the American context or the broader one.

And communism is not a measure of leftism or whatever you were getting at.


quote:
They were also certainly opposite of those involved in the Harlem Renaissance, W.E.B, Paine, and Douglas, who were ardent intergrationist and WEB a communist.

Opposing the above didn't make them their political opposites. The Black left or those in the Black Radical tradition has always been opposed to integrationist (Malcolm X/NOI vs. MLK) and none of that made them the polar political opposites in some left - right continuum.

There's the left (of center) and then there's further to the left and plenty of opposition in between.

It would be nice if you would keep your distinction clean without the confusion (on your part). For all the institution building Booker T. accomplished, he was still an accomodationist that Garvey never was. Garvey, indeed, was opposed to Booker T.'s practice in that respect. And as far as DuBois and Garvey, it is disingenuous not to note DuBois' own Pan-Africanism, if even belated, which gave him one great similarity/kinship with Garvey.

Oh and we've seen DuBois positioned as a (Great) Black Conservative right along with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. So pardon us as we all join in the great choir song:

Black conservatives are so freakin' desperate!
Seriously - this is efeminate as hell. What was the point of going over to another discussion board and bringing his conversation over here to fuck with this dude for? If he wanted to discuss this conversation here he would have posted it here.

So you justify fucking with this dude under the auspices of expressing your afro-political opinions? As long as you consider the purpose for fucking with this dude to be constructive and for debatable reasons it's supposed to be okay? I thought we were supposed to "get along" here? Pathetic. If anybody is lonely it's somebody like you, nmaginate. You ain't got enough to do here on this discussion board acting like you're out of your damn mind - that ain't enough - you gotta bring shit from another discussion board. But you're the good guy and I'm the troll.

It's all good, though.
Great article on Cosby. Writer agrees with my veiw that Garvey and his like are conservatives, I always thought it was obvious.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200805/cosby

Last summer, in Detroit's St. Paul Church of God in Christ, I watched Bill Cosby summon his inner Malcolm X. It was a hot July evening. Cosby was speaking to an audience of black men dressed in everything from Enyce T-shirts or polos to blazers and ties. Some were there with their sons. Some were there in wheelchairs. The audience was packed tight, rows of folding chairs extended beyond the wooden pews to capture the overflow. But the chairs were not enough, and late arrivals stood against the long shotgun walls, or out in the small lobby, where they hoped to catch a snatch of Cosby's oratory. Clutching a cordless mic, Cosby paced the front of the church, shifting between prepared remarks and comic ad-libs. A row of old black men, community elders, sat behind him, nodding and grunting throaty affirmations. The rest of the church was in full call-and-response mode, punctuating Cosby's punch lines with laughter, applause, or cries of "Teach, black man! Teach!"

He began with the story of a black girl who'd risen to become valedictorian of his old high school, despite having been abandoned by her father. "She spoke to the graduating class and her speech started like this," Cosby said. "˜I was 5 years old. It was Saturday and I stood looking out the window, waiting for him.' She never said what helped turn her around. She never mentioned her mother, grandmother, or great-grandmother."

"Understand me," Cosby said, his face contorted and clenched like a fist. "Men? Men? Men! Where are you, men?"

Audience: "Right here!"

Cosby had come to Detroit aiming to grab the city's black men by their collars and shake them out of the torpor that has left so many of them"”like so many of their peers across the country"”undereducated, over-incarcerated, and underrepresented in the ranks of active fathers. No women were in the audience. No reporters were allowed, for fear that their presence might frighten off fathers behind on their child-support payments. But I was there, trading on race, gender, and a promise not to interview any of the allegedly skittish participants.

"Men, if you want to win, we can win," Cosby said. "We are not a pitiful race of people. We are a bright race, who can move with the best. But we are in a new time, where people are behaving in abnormal ways and calling it normal ... When they used to come into our neighborhoods, we put the kids in the basement, grabbed a rifle, and said, ˜By any means necessary.'

"I don't want to talk about hatred of these people," he continued. "I'm talking about a time when we protected our women and protected our children. Now I got people in wheelchairs, paralyzed. A little girl in Camden, jumping rope, shot through the mouth. Grandmother saw it out the window. And people are waiting around for Jesus to come, when Jesus is already within you."

Cosby was wearing his standard uniform"”dark sunglasses, loafers, a sweat suit emblazoned with the seal of an institution of higher learning. That night it was the University of Massachusetts, where he'd gotten his doctorate in education 30 years ago. He was preaching from the book of black self-reliance, a gospel that he has spent the past four years carrying across the country in a series of events that he bills as "call-outs." "My problem," Cosby told the audience, "is I'm tired of losing to white people. When I say I don't care about white people, I mean let them say what they want to say. What can they say to me that's worse than what their grandfather said?"

From Birmingham to Cleveland and Baltimore, at churches and colleges, Cosby has been telling thousands of black Americans that racism in America is omnipresent but that it can't be an excuse to stop striving. As Cosby sees it, the antidote to racism is not rallies, protests, or pleas, but strong families and communities. Instead of focusing on some abstract notion of equality, he argues, blacks need to cleanse their culture, embrace personal responsibility, and reclaim the traditions that fortified them in the past. Driving Cosby's tough talk about values and responsibility is a vision starkly different from Martin Luther King's gauzy, all-inclusive dream: it's an America of competing powers, and a black America that is no longer content to be the weakest of the lot.

It's heady stuff, especially coming from the man white America remembers as a sitcom star and affable pitchman for E. F. Hutton, Kodak, and Jell-O Pudding Pops. And Cosby's race-based crusade is particularly jarring now. Across the country, as black politics has become more professionalized, the rhetoric of race is giving way to the rhetoric of standards and results. Newark's young Ivy League–educated mayor, Cory Booker, ran for office promising competence and crime reduction, as did Washington's mayor, Adrian Fenty. Indeed, we are now enjoying a moment of national self-congratulation over racial progress, with a black man running for president as the very realization of King's dream. Barack Obama defied efforts by the Clinton campaign to pigeonhole him as a "black" candidate, casting himself instead as the symbol of a society that has moved beyond lazy categories of race.

Black America does not entirely share the euphoria, though. The civil-rights generation is exiting the American stage"”not in a haze of nostalgia but in a cloud of gloom, troubled by the persistence of racism, the apparent weaknesses of the generation following in its wake, and the seeming indifference of much of the country to black America's fate. In that climate, Cosby's gospel of discipline, moral reform, and self-reliance offers a way out"”a promise that one need not cure America of its original sin in order to succeed. Racism may not be extinguished, but it can be beaten.

Has Dr. Huxtable, the head of one of America's most beloved television households, seen the truth: that the dream of integration should never supplant the pursuit of self-respect; that blacks should worry more about judging themselves and less about whether whites are judging them on the content of their character? Or has he lost his mind?

From the moment he registered in the American popular consciousness, as the Oxford-educated Alexander Scott in the NBC adventure series I Spy, Cosby proffered the idea of an America that transcended race. The series, which started in 1965, was the first weekly show to feature an African American in a lead role, but it rarely factored race into dialogue or plots. Race was also mostly inconspicuous in Cosby's performances as a hugely popular stand-up comedian. "I don't spend my hours worrying how to slip a social message into my act," Cosby told Playboy in 1969. He also said that he didn't "have time to sit around and worry whether all the black people of the world make it because of me. I have my own gig to worry about." His crowning artistic and commercial achievement"”The Cosby Show, which ran from 1984 to 1992"”was seemingly a monument to that understated sensibility.

In fact, blackness was never absent from the show or from Bill Cosby. Plots involved black artists like Stevie Wonder or Dizzy Gillespie. The Huxtables' home was decorated with the works of black artists like Annie Lee, and the show featured black theater veterans such as Roscoe Lee Brown and Moses Gunn. Behind the scenes, Cosby hired the Harvard psychiatrist Alvin Poussaint to make sure that the show never trafficked in stereotypes and that it depicted blacks in a dignified light. Picking up Cosby's fixation on education, Poussaint had writers insert references to black schools. "If the script mentioned Oberlin, Texas Tech, or Yale, we'd circle it and tell them to mention a black college," Poussaint told me in a phone interview last year. "I remember going to work the next day and white people saying, ˜What's the school called Morehouse?'" In 1985, Cosby riled NBC by placing an anti-apartheid sign in his Huxtable son's bedroom. The network wanted no part of the debate. "There may be two sides to apartheid in Archie Bunker's house," the Toronto Star quoted Cosby as saying. "But it's impossible that the Huxtables would be on any side but one. That sign will stay on that door. And I've told NBC that if they still want it down, or if they try to edit it out, there will be no show." The sign stayed.

Offstage, Cosby's philanthropy won him support among the civil-rights crowd. He made his biggest splash in 1988, when he and his wife gave $20 million to Spelman College, the largest individual donation ever given to a black college. "Two million would have been fantastic; 20 million, to use the language of the hip-hop generation, was off the chain," says Johnnetta Cole, who was then president of Spelman. Race again came to the fore in 1997, when Cosby's son was randomly shot and killed while fixing a flat on a Los Angeles freeway. His wife wrote an op-ed in USA Today arguing that white racism lay behind her son's death. "All African-Americans, regardless of their educational and economic accomplishments, have been and are at risk in America simply because of their skin colors," she wrote. "Most people know that facing the truth brings about healing and growth. When is America going to face its historical and current racial realities so it can be what it says it is?"

The column caused a minor row, but most of white America took little notice. To them, Cosby was still America's Dad. But those close to Cosby were not surprised. Cosby was an avowed race man, who, like much of his generation, had come to feel that black America had lost its way. The crisis of absentee fathers, the rise of black-on-black crime, and the spread of hip-hop all led Cosby to believe that, after the achievements of the 1960s, the black community was committing cultural suicide.

His anger and frustration erupted into public view during an NAACP awards ceremony in Washington in 2004 commemorating the 50th anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education. At that moment, the shades of mortality and irrelevance seemed to be drawing over the civil-rights generation. Its matriarchs, Rosa Parks and Coretta Scott King, would be dead within two years. The NAACP's membership rolls had been shrinking; within months, its president, Kweisi Mfume, would resign (it was later revealed that he was under investigation by the NAACP for sexual harassment and nepotism"”allegations that he denied). Other movement leaders were drifting into self-parody: Al Sharpton would soon be hosting a reality show and, a year later, would be doing ads for a predatory loan company; Sharpton and Jesse Jackson had recently asked MGM to issue an apology for the hit movie Barbershop.

That night, Cosby was one of the last honorees to take the podium. He began by noting that although civil-rights activists had opened the door for black America, young people today, instead of stepping through, were stepping backward. "No longer is a person embarrassed because they're pregnant without a husband," he told the crowd. "No longer is a boy considered an embarrassment if he tries to run away from being the father of the unmarried child."

There was cheering as Cosby went on. Perhaps sensing that he had the crowd, he grew looser. "The lower-economic and lower-middle-economic people are not holding their end in this deal," he told the audience.

Cosby disparaged activists who charge the criminal-justice system with racism. "These are people going around stealing Coca-Cola. People getting shot in the back of the head over a piece of pound cake," Cosby said. "Then we all run out and are outraged: ˜The cops shouldn't have shot him.' What the hell was he doing with the pound cake in his hand? I wanted a piece of pound cake just as bad as anybody else. And I looked at it and I had no money. And something called parenting said, ˜If you get caught with it, you're going to embarrass your mother.'"

Then he attacked African American naming traditions, and the style of dress among young blacks: "Ladies and gentlemen, listen to these people. They are showing you what's wrong ... What part of Africa did this come from? We are not Africans. Those people are not Africans. They don't know a damned thing about Africa"” with names like Shaniqua, Shaligua, Mohammed, and all that crap, and all of them are in jail." About then, people began to walk out of the auditorium and cluster in the lobby. There was still cheering, but some guests milled around and wondered what had happened. Some thought old age had gotten the best of Cosby. The mood was one of shock.

After what has come to be known as "the Pound Cake speech""”it has its own Wikipedia entry"”Cosby came under attack from various quarters of the black establishment. The playwright August Wilson commented, "A billionaire attacking poor people for being poor. Bill Cosby is a clown. What do you expect?" One of the gala's hosts, Ted Shaw, the director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, called his comments "a harsh attack on poor black people in particular." Dubbing Cosby an "Afristocrat in Winter," the Georgetown University professor Michael Eric Dyson came out with a book, Is Bill Cosby Right? Or Has the Black Middle Class Lost Its Mind?, that took issue with Cosby's bleak assessment of black progress and belittled his transformation from vanilla humorist to social critic and moral arbiter. "While Cosby took full advantage of the civil rights struggle," argued Dyson, "he resolutely denied it a seat at his artistic table."

But Cosby's rhetoric played well in black barbershops, churches, and backyard barbecues, where a unique brand of conservatism still runs strong. Outsiders may have heard haranguing in Cosby's language and tone. But much of black America heard instead the possibility of changing their communities without having to wait on the consciences and attention spans of policy makers who might not have their interests at heart. Shortly after Cosby took his Pound Cake message on the road, I wrote an article denouncing him as an elitist. When my father, a former Black Panther, read it, he upbraided me for attacking what he saw as a message of black empowerment. Cosby's argument has resonated with the black mainstream for just that reason.


From Atlantic Unbound:


"The Awakening of the Negro"
(September 1896)
"Friction between the races will pass away in proportion as the black man, by reason of his skill, intelligence, and character, can produce something that the white man wants or respects in the commercial world." By Booker T. Washington


The split between Cosby and critics such as Dyson mirrors not only America's broader conservative/liberal split but black America's own historic intellectual divide. Cosby's most obvious antecedent is Booker T. Washington. At the turn of the 20th century, Washington married a defense of the white South with a call for black self-reliance and became the most prominent black leader of his day. He argued that southern whites should be given time to adjust to emancipation; in the meantime, blacks should advance themselves not by voting and running for office but by working, and ultimately owning, the land.


From Atlantic Unbound:


"Strivings of the Negro People"
(August 1897)
"The Negro is a sort of seventh son, born with a veil, and gifted with second-sight in this American world... This is the end of his striving: to be a co-worker in the kingdom of culture, to escape both death and isolation, and to husband and use his best powers." By W.E.B. Du Bois


W. E. B. Du Bois, the integrationist model for the Dysons of our day, saw Washington as an apologist for white racism and thought that his willingness to sacrifice the black vote was heretical. History ultimately rendered half of Washington's argument moot. His famous Atlanta Compromise"”in which he endorsed segregation as a temporary means of making peace with southerners"”was answered by lynchings, land theft, and general racial terrorism. But Washington's appeal to black self-sufficiency endured.

After Washington's death, in 1915, the black conservative tradition he had fathered found a permanent and natural home in the emerging ideology of Black Nationalism. Marcus Garvey, its patron saint, turned the Atlanta Compromise on its head, implicitly endorsing segregation not as an olive branch to whites but as a statement of black supremacy. Black Nationalists scorned the Du Boisian integrationists as stooges or traitors, content to beg for help from people who hated them.

Garvey argued that blacks had rendered themselves unworthy of the white man's respect. "The greatest stumbling block in the way of progress in the race has invariably come from within the race itself," wrote Garvey. "The monkey wrench of destruction as thrown into the cog of Negro Progress, is not thrown so much by the outsider as by the very fellow who is in our fold, and who should be the first to grease the wheel of progress rather than seeking to impede." Decades later, Malcolm X echoed that sentiment, faulting blacks for failing to take charge of their destinies. "The white man is too intelligent to let someone else come and gain control of the economy of his community," Malcolm said. "But you will let anybody come in and take control of the economy of your community, control the housing, control the education, control the jobs, control the businesses, under the pretext that you want to integrate. No, you're out of your mind."

Black conservatives like Malcolm X and Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the Nation of Islam, have at times allied themselves with black liberals. But in general, they have upheld a core of beliefs laid out by Garvey almost a century ago: a skepticism of (white) government as a mediating force in the "Negro problem," a strong belief in the singular will of black people, and a fixation on a supposedly glorious black past.

Those beliefs also animate Come On People, the manifesto that Cosby and Poussaint published last fall. Although it does not totally dismiss government programs, the book mostly advocates solutions from within as a cure for black America's dismal vital statistics. "Once we find our bearings," they write, "we can move forward, as we have always done, on the path from victims to victors." Come On People is heavy on black pride ("no group of people has had the impact on the culture of the whole world that African Americans have had, and much of that impact has been for the good"), and heavier on the idea of the Great Fall"”the theory, in this case, that post–Jim Crow blacks have lost touch with the cultural traditions that enabled them to persevere through centuries of oppression.

"For all the woes of segregation, there were some good things to come out of it," Cosby and Poussaint write. "One was that it forced us to take care of ourselves. When restaurants, laundries, hotels, theaters, groceries, and clothing stores were segregated, black people opened and ran their own. Black life insurance companies and banks thrived, as well as black funeral homes ... Such successes provided jobs and strength to black economic well-being. They also gave black people that gratifying sense of an interdependent community." Although the authors take pains to put some distance between themselves and the Nation of Islam, they approvingly quote one of its ministers who spoke at a call-out in Compton, California: "I went to Koreatown today and I met with the Korean merchants," the minister told the crowd. "I love them. You know why? They got a place called what? Koreatown. When I left them, I went to Chinatown. They got a place called what? Chinatown. Where is your town?"

The notion of the Great Fall, and the attendant theory that segregation gave rise to some "good things," are the stock-in-trade of what Christopher Alan Bracey, a law professor at Washington University, calls (in his book, Saviors or Sellouts) the "organic" black conservative tradition: conservatives who favor hard work and moral reform over protests and government intervention, but whose black-nationalist leanings make them anathema to the Heritage Foundation and Rush Limbaugh. When political strategists argue that the Republican Party is missing a huge chance to court the black community, they are thinking of this mostly male bloc"”the old guy in the barbershop, the grizzled Pop Warner coach, the retired Vietnam vet, the drunk uncle at the family reunion. He votes Democratic, not out of any love for abortion rights or progressive taxation, but because he feels"”in fact, he knows"”that the modern-day GOP draws on the support of people who hate him. This is the audience that flocks to Cosby: culturally conservative black Americans who are convinced that integration, and to some extent the entire liberal dream, robbed them of their natural defenses.

"There are things that we did not see coming," Cosby told me over lunch in Manhattan last year. "Like, you could see the Klan, but because these things were not on a horse, because there was no white sheet, and the people doing the deed were not white, we saw things in the light of family and forgiveness ... We didn't pay attention to the dropout rate. We didn't pay attention to the fathers, to the self-esteem of our boys."

Given the state of black America, it is hard to quarrel with that analysis. Blacks are 13 percent of the population, yet black men account for 49 percent of America's murder victims and 41 percent of the prison population. The teen birth rate for blacks is 63 per 1,000, more than double the rate for whites. In 2005, black families had the lowest median income of any ethnic group measured by the Census, making only 61 percent of the median income of white families.

Most troubling is a recent study released by the Pew Charitable Trusts, which concluded that the rate at which blacks born into the middle class in the 1960s backslid into poverty or near-poverty (45 percent) was three times that of whites"”suggesting that the advances of even some of the most successful cohorts of black America remain tenuous at best. Another Pew survey, released last November, found that blacks were "less upbeat about the state of black progress now than at any time since 1983."

The rise of the organic black conservative tradition is also a response to America's retreat from its second attempt at Reconstruction. Blacks have watched as the courts have weakened affirmative action, arguably the country's greatest symbol of state-sponsored inclusion. They've seen a fraudulent war on drugs that, judging by the casualties, looks like a war on black people. They've seen themselves bandied about as playthings in the presidential campaigns of Ronald Reagan (with his 1980 invocation of states' rights" in Mississippi), George Bush (Willie Horton), Bill Clinton (Sister Souljah), and George W. Bush (McCain's fabled black love-child). They've seen the utter failures of school busing and housing desegregation, as well as the horrors of Katrina. The result is a broad distrust of government as the primary tool for black progress.

In May 2004, just one day before Cosby's Pound Cake speech, TheNew York Times visited Louisville, Kentucky, once ground zero in the fight to integrate schools. But TheTimes found that sides had switched, and that black parents were more interested in educational progress than in racial parity. "Integration? What was it good for?" one parent asked. "They were just setting up our babies to fail."

In response to these perceived failures, many black activists have turned their efforts inward. Geoffrey Canada's ambitious Harlem Children's Zone project pushes black students to change their study habits and improve their home life. In cities like Baltimore and New York, community groups are focusing on turning black men into active fathers. In Philadelphia last October, thousands of black men packed the Liacouras Center, pledging to patrol their neighborhoods and help combat the rising murder rate. When Cosby came to St. Paul Church in Detroit, one local judge got up and urged Cosby and other black celebrities to donate more money to advance the cause. "I didn't fly out here to write a check," Cosby retorted. "I'm not writing a check in Houston, Detroit, or Philadelphia. Leave these athletes alone. All you know is Oprah Winfrey and Michael Jackson. Forget about a check ... This is how we lost to the white man. ˜Judge said Bill Cosby is gonna write a check, but until then ... '"

Instead of waiting for handouts or outside help, Cosby argues, disadvantaged blacks should start by purging their own culture of noxious elements like gangsta rap, a favorite target. "What do record producers think when they churn out that gangsta rap with antisocial, women-hating messages?," Cosby and Poussaint ask in their book. "Do they think that black male youth won't act out what they have repeated since they were old enough to listen?" Cosby's rhetoric on culture echoes"”and amplifies"”a swelling strain of black opinion: last November's Pew study reported that 71 percent of blacks feel that rap is a bad influence.

The strain of black conservatism that Cosby evokes has also surfaced in the presidential campaign of Barack Obama. Early on, some commentators speculated that Obama's Cosby-esque appeals to personal responsibility would cost him black votes. But if his admonishments for black kids to turn off the PlayStation and for black fathers to do their jobs did him any damage, it was not reflected at the polls. In fact, this sort of rhetoric amounts to something of a racial double play, allowing Obama and Cosby to cater both to culturally conservative blacks and to whites who are convinced that black America is a bastion of decadence. (Curiously, Cosby is noncommittal verging on prickly when it comes to Obama. When Larry King asked him whether he supported Obama, he bristled: "Do you ask white people this question? ... I want to know why this fellow especially is brought up in such a special way. How many Americans in the media really take him seriously, or do they look at him like some prize brown baby?" The exchange ended with Cosby professing admiration for Dennis Kucinich. Months later, he rebuffed my requests for his views on Obama's candidacy.)

The shift in focus from white racism to black culture is not as new as some social commentators make it out to be. Standing in St. Paul Church on that July evening listening to Cosby, I remembered the last time The Street felt like this: in the summer of 1994, after Louis Farrakhan announced the Million Man March. Farrakhan barnstormed the country holding "men only" meetings (but much larger). I saw him in my native Baltimore, while home from Howard University on vacation. The march itself was cathartic. I walked with four or five other black men, and all along the way black women stood on porches or out on the street, shouting, clapping, cheering. For us, Farrakhan's opinions on the Jews mostly seemed beside the point; what stuck was the chance to assert our humanity and our manhood by marching on the Mall, and not acting like we were all fresh out of San Quentin. We lived in the shadow of the '80s crack era. So many of us had been jailed or were on our way. So many of us were fathers in biology only. We believed ourselves disgraced and clung to the march as a public statement: the time had come to grow up.

Black conservatives have been dipping into this well of lost black honor since the turn of the 20th century. On the one hand, vintage black nationalists have harked back to a golden age of black Africa, where mighty empires sprawled and everyone was a king. Meanwhile, populist black conservatives like Cosby point to pre-1968 black America as an era when blacks were united in the struggle: men were men, and a girl who got pregnant without getting married would find herself bundled off to Grandpa's farm.

What both visions share is a sense that black culture in its present form is bastardized and pathological. What they also share is a foundation in myth. Black people are not the descendants of kings. We are"”and I say this with big pride"”the progeny of slaves. If there's any majesty in our struggle, it lies not in fairy tales but in those humble origins and the great distance we've traveled since. Ditto for the dreams of a separate but noble past. Cosby's, and much of black America's, conservative analysis flattens history and smooths over the wrinkles that have characterized black America since its inception.

Indeed, a century ago, the black brain trust was pushing the same rhetoric that Cosby is pushing today. It was concerned that slavery had essentially destroyed the black family and was obsessed with seemingly the same issues"”crime, wanton sexuality, and general moral turpitude"”that Cosby claims are recent developments. "The early effort of middle-class blacks to respond to segregation was, aside from a political agenda, focused on a social-reform agenda," says Khalil G. Muhammad, a professor of American history at Indiana University. "The National Association of Colored Women, Du Bois in The Philadelphia Negro, all shared a sense of anxiety that African Americans were not presenting their best selves to the world. There was the sense that they were committing crimes and needed to keep their sexuality in check." Adds William Jelani Cobb, a professor of American history at Spelman College: "The same kind of people who were advocating for social reform were denigrating people because they didn't play piano. They often saw themselves as reluctant caretakers of the less enlightened."

In particular, Cosby's argument"”that much of what haunts young black men originates in post-segregation black culture"”doesn't square with history. As early as the 1930s, sociologists were concerned that black men were falling behind black women. In his classic study, The Negro Family in the United States, published in 1939, E. Franklin Frazier argued that urbanization was undermining the ability of men to provide for their families. In 1965"”at the height of the civil-rights movement"”Daniel Patrick Moynihan's milestone report, "The Negro Family: The Case for National Action," picked up the same theme.

At times, Cosby seems willfully blind to the parallels between his arguments and those made in the presumably glorious past. Consider his problems with rap. How could an avowed jazz fanatic be oblivious to the similar plaints once sparked by the music of his youth? "The tired longshoreman, the porter, the housemaid and the poor elevator boy in search of recreation, seeking in jazz the tonic for weary nerves and muscles," wrote the lay historian J. A. Rogers, "are only too apt to find the bootlegger, the gambler and the demi-monde who have come there for victims and to escape the eyes of the police."

Beyond the apocryphal notion that black culture was once a fount of virtue, there's still the charge that culture is indeed the problem. But to reach that conclusion, you'd have to stand on some rickety legs. The hip-hop argument, again, is particularly creaky. Ronald Ferguson, a Harvard social scientist, has highlighted that an increase in hip-hop's popularity during the early 1990s corresponded with a declining amount of time spent reading among black kids. But gangsta rap can be correlated with other phenomena, too"”many of them positive. During the 1990s, as gangsta rap exploded, teen pregnancy and the murder rate among black men declined. Should we give the blue ribbon in citizenship to Dr. Dre?

"I don't know how to measure culture. I don't know how to test its effects, and I'm not sure anyone else does," says the Georgetown economist Harry Holzer. "There's a liberal story that limited opportunities, and barriers, lead to employment problems and criminal records, but then there's another story that has to do with norms, behaviors, and oppositional culture. You can't prove the latter statistically, but it still might be true." Holzer thinks that both arguments contain truth and that one doesn't preclude the other. Fair enough. Suffice it to say, though, that the evidence supporting structural inequality is compelling. In 2001, a researcher sent out black and white job applicants in Milwaukee, randomly assigning them a criminal record. The researcher concluded that a white man with a criminal record had about the same chance of getting a job as a black man without one. Three years later, researchers produced the same results in New York under more-rigorous conditions.

The accepted wisdom is that such studies are a comfort to black people, allowing them to wallow in their misery. In fact, the opposite is true"”the liberal notion that blacks are still, after a century of struggle, victims of pervasive discrimination is the ultimate collective buzz-kill. It effectively means that African Americans must, on some level, accept that their children will be "less than" until some point in the future when white racism miraculously abates. That's not the sort of future that any black person eagerly awaits, nor does it make for particularly motivating talking points.

Last summer, I watched Cosby give a moving commencement speech to a group of Connecticut inmates who'd just received their GEDs. Before the speech, at eight in the morning, Cosby quizzed correctional officials on the conditions and characteristics of their inmate population. I wished, then, that my 7-year-old son could have seen Cosby there, to take in the same basic message that I endeavor to serve him every day"”that manhood means more than virility and strut, that it calls for discipline and dutiful stewardship. That the ultimate fate of black people lies in their own hands, not in the hands of their antagonists. That as an African American, he has a duty to his family, his community, and his ancestors.

If Cosby's call-outs simply ended at that"”a personal and communal creed"”there'd be little to oppose. But Cosby often pits the rhetoric of personal responsibility against the legitimate claims of American citizens for their rights. He chides activists for pushing to reform the criminal-justice system, despite solid evidence that the criminal-justice system needs reform. His historical amnesia"”his assertion that many of the problems that pervade black America are of a recent vintage"”is simply wrong, as is his contention that today's young African Americans are somehow weaker, that they've dropped the ball. And for all its positive energy, his language of uplift has its limitations. After the Million Man March, black men embraced a sense of hope and promise. We were supposed to return to our communities and families inspired by a new feeling of responsibility. Yet here we are again, almost 15 years later, with seemingly little tangible change. I'd take my son to see Bill Cosby, to hear his message, to revel in its promise and optimism. But afterward, he and I would have a very long talk.

On the day last summer when Cosby met me for lunch in the West Village, it was raining, as it had been all week, and New York was experiencing a record-cold August. Cosby had just come from Max Roach's funeral and was dressed in a natty three-piece suit. Despite the weather, the occasion, and the oddly empty dining room, Cosby was energized. He had spent the previous day in Philadelphia, where he spoke to a group in a housing project, met with state health officials, and participated in a community march against crime. Grassroots black activists in his hometown were embracing his call. He planned, over the coming year, to continue his call-outs and release a hip-hop album. (He has also noted, however, that there won't be any profanity on it.)

Cosby was feeling warm and nostalgic. He asked why I had not brought my son, and I instantly regretted dropping him off at my partner's workplace for a couple of hours. He talked about breaking his shoulder playing school football, after his grandfather had tried to get him to quit. "Granddad Cosby got on the trolley and came over to the apartment," he recalled. "I was so embarrassed. I was laid out on the sofa. He was talking to my parents, and I was waiting for the moment when he would say, ˜See, I told you, Junior.' He came back and reached in his pocket and gave me a quarter. He said, ˜Go to the corner and get some ice cream. It has calcium in it.'"

Much pop psychology has been devoted to Cosby's transformation into such a high-octane, high-profile activist. His nemesis Dyson says that Cosby, in his later years, is following in the dishonorable tradition of upper-class African Americans who denounce their less fortunate brethren. Others have suggested more-sinister motivations"”that Cosby is covering for his own alleged transgressions. (In 2006, Cosby settled a civil lawsuit filed by a woman who claimed that he had sexually assaulted her; other women have come forward with similar allegations that have not gone to court.) But the depth of his commitment would seem to belie such suspicions, and in any case, they do not seem to have affected his hold on his audience: in the November Pew survey, 85 percent of all African American respondents considered him a "good influence" on the black community, above Obama (76 percent) and second only to Oprah Winfrey (87 percent).

Part of what drives Cosby's activism, and reinforces his message, is the rage that lives in all African Americans, a collective feeling of disgrace that borders on self-hatred. As the comedian Chris Rock put it in one of his infamous routines, "Everything white people don't like about black people, black people really don't like about black people ... It's like a civil war going on with black people, and it's two sides"”there's black people and there's niggas, and niggas have got to go ... Boy, I wish they'd let me join the Ku Klux Klan. Shit, I'd do a drive-by from here to Brooklyn." (Rock stopped performing the routine when he noticed that his white fans were laughing a little too hard.) Liberalism, with its pat logic and focus on structural inequities, offers no balm for this sort of raw pain. Like the people he preaches to, Cosby has grown tired of hanging his head.

This disquiet spans generations, but it is most acute among those of the civil-rights era. "I don't know a better term than angst," says Johnnetta Cole. "I refuse to categorize every young African American with the same language, but there are some ˜young'uns'"”and some of us who are not ˜young'uns'"”who must turn around and look at where we are, because where we're headed isn't pretty." Like many of the stars of the civil-rights movement, Cole has gifts that go beyond social activism. She rose out of the segregated South and went to college at age 15, eventually earning a bachelor's from Oberlin and a doctorate in anthropology from Northwestern. That same sort of dynamism exists today among many younger blacks, but what troubles the older generation is that their energy seems directed at other pursuits besides social uplift.

Cosby is fond of saying that sacrifices of the '60s weren't made so that rappers and young people could repeatedly use the word nigger. But that's exactly why they were made. After all, chief among all individual rights awarded Americans is the right to be mediocre, crass, and juvenile"”in other words, the right to be human. But Cosby is aiming for something superhuman"”twice as good, as the elders used to say"”and his homily to a hazy black past seems like an effort to redeem something more than the present.

When people hear Bill Cosby's message, many assume that he is the product of the sort of family he's promoting"”two caring parents, a stable home life, a working father. In fact, like many of the men he admonishes, Cosby was born into a troubled home. He was raised by his mother because his father, who joined the Navy, abandoned the family when Cosby was a child. Speaking to me of his youth, Cosby said, "People told me I was bright, but nobody stayed on me. My mother was too busy trying to feed and clothe us." He was smart enough to be admitted to Central High School, a magnet school in Philadelphia, but transferred and then dropped out in 10th grade and followed his father into the service.

But the twists and turns of that reality seem secondary to the tidier, more appealing world that Cosby is trying to create. Toward the end of our lunch, in a long, rambling monologue, Cosby told me, "If you looked at me and said, ˜Why is he doing this? Why right now?,' you could probably say, ˜He's having a resurgence of his childhood.' What do I need if I am a child today? I need people to guide me. I need the possibility of change. I need people to stop saying I can't pull myself up by my own bootstraps. They say that's a myth. But these other people have their mythical stories"”why can't we have our own?"
quote:
From Birmingham to Cleveland and Baltimore, at churches and colleges, Cosby has been telling thousands of black Americans that racism in America is omnipresent but that it can't be an excuse to stop striving. As Cosby sees it, the antidote to racism is not rallies, protests, or pleas, but strong families and communities. Instead of focusing on some abstract notion of equality, he argues, blacks need to cleanse their culture, embrace personal responsibility, and reclaim the traditions that fortified them in the past.


quote:
Black conservatives have been dipping into this well of lost black honor since the turn of the 20th century. On the one hand, vintage black nationalists have harked back to a golden age of black Africa, where mighty empires sprawled and everyone was a king. Meanwhile, populist black conservatives like Cosby point to pre-1968 black America as an era when blacks were united in the struggle: men were men, and a girl who got pregnant without getting married would find herself bundled off to Grandpa's farm.


quote:
The rise of the organic black conservative tradition is also a response to America's retreat from its second attempt at Reconstruction. Blacks have watched as the courts have weakened affirmative action, arguably the country's greatest symbol of state-sponsored inclusion. They've seen a fraudulent war on drugs that, judging by the casualties, looks like a war on black people. They've seen themselves bandied about as playthings in the presidential campaigns of Ronald Reagan (with his 1980 invocation of states' rights" in Mississippi), George Bush (Willie Horton), Bill Clinton (Sister Souljah), and George W. Bush (McCain's fabled black love-child). They've seen the utter failures of school busing and housing desegregation, as well as the horrors of Katrina. The result is a broad distrust of government as the primary tool for black progress
This is an interesting take on the term "black conservative." To me, a conservative essentially is one who takes a fairly hard line on the side of exclusion and against accommodation. I know I just made that up, but when you apply the term "conservative" to the various kinds of ideologies around the world that are considered "conservative," it works better than other, more frequently used definitions. "Conservatives" may in fact have wildly opposite ideologies. Remember, a "conservative" in Russia or the former USSR is a hard line, staunch Communist opposed to open markets and economic freedom. A staunch white supremacist opposed to integration is "conservative" as to that issue.

So it occurs to me that black right-wingers, like the Larry Elders, are not really "conservative" from a black perspective, because they are really all about inclusion and accommodation. These folks are the ultimate "integrationists," when you think about it (just look at whom they tend to marry).

Bottom line is that it's disingenuous to cast these these people in the same ideological light as black nationalists, even though, from a purely black nationalist standpoint, the more hardline a person is in his black nationalist stance, the more "conservative" he is as to that point, it's clear not only that they are very different ideologically, but also that their differences place them at opposite ends of what I feel is a useful working definition of "conservative."
Very good article on older self contained Black communities. Not really from a conservative perspective but certainly from the Right. 
 http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/wicks5.html

 

People often use anarchy and chaos interchangeably. They refer to civil unrest as "anarchy, total chaos." As an anarchist of the anarcho-libertarian variety myself, naturally, this habit irks me. Anarchy is simply the absence of forceful authority. Chaos is disorder. The two things can coexist, but it may be shocking to some to find that the presence of the one does not imply the presence of the other. Nor does the absence of the one imply the absence of the other. They are neither unrelated nor equivalent. And the correlation between the two can often be surprising. This is particularly true among blacks.

I grew up in a black, rural community in Mississippi. I have always enjoyed listening to the stories of the past from my elders. Many of them were relatives from other cities such as Detroit and Chicago. Others were local, or from other parts of the South. One common thread among their reminiscences was the notion that while things were in many ways worse, since there were legal barriers in place which limited black property rights, the neighborhoods themselves were safer than the surrounding areas. In short, blacks were endangered when they encountered law enforcement or people who had the support of law enforcement, since those things enabled them to use force against blacks without fear of retaliation or negative repercussions. Within those black communities in many areas, however, there was no law enforcement, unless they had been summoned. The day-to-day life of those blacks, so long as they remained within their own neighborhoods was essentially anarchic. The state was what was encountered when one left the neighborhood, be it for business or pleasure.

Those neighborhoods, with their localized anarchy, were nonetheless orderly places. The communities policed themselves through ostracism and familial ties. There was little disorder within anarchy. Black-owned businesses served primarily black customers, unless the state intervened to prevent even that bit of freedom. Even during my own childhood in the 1970s, police presence in my community was an almost unheard of occurrence. Crimes and vices were handled among families and family members. Even though some people could be considered leaders, those leaders were followed voluntarily. There was no mayor who forced his edicts upon supporters and opponents alike. Each community was usually a little pocket of anarchy. The well-known negatives associated with involving oneself with a hostile state made self-governing a far better alternative. Consider, however, the situation today: Blacks often have far more frequent encounters with the state. Everything is regulated. There is little anarchy. From drug laws and house raids, which limit what a person can do with his own property and body, to welfare and subsidized housing, which allow a person who has not shown the ability to earn his own keep to remained housed, clothed, and well-fed without having to display character traits which are necessary to earn those things, the state is a constant intruder on the social order. And what do we frequently see in those areas now? Chaos. Disorder. Mayhem. Government.

What afflicts many American black neighborhoods and communities today is not the absence of rules so much as the natural effects of rules forced upon the unwilling. In stark contrast to the more organic leadership of church and business leaders of past generations, modern "leaders" are most frequently bureaucrats or government shills who profit from government action. Since they profit from the state, they are naturally disposed to defend the state. This treachery is clearly on display when we look at how these so-called leaders endorse two things which are devastating to blacks nationwide: the war on drugs and welfare. When we look honestly at the actual effects of these two programs, we see a horror story of nearly unparalleled proportions. Illegitimacy is rampant largely due to the state's subsidizing of irresponsibility. The high levels of violence in many neighborhoods is almost entirely the product of the barbaric war on drugs. Despite these things, the misguided, the foolish, and the downright evil continue to support both of these horrible assaults on property rights and common decency. Make no mistake: any black person who is in favor of the war on drugs is morally defective, mentally defective, or both. The argument for welfare is the common mistake of all socialists. There is no way to do evil and produce only good as a result. What these communities, and all others, need is the elimination of the false, imposed "order" of the state, and more of the unpredictable, natural true order of voluntary association. The state, by attempting to control the natural tendencies of humans to improve themselves and their own conditions, causes the very chaos it claims to prevent.

This really should be surprising to no one. Most of us live in homes which are largely anarchic, yet which have less crime and violence than city streets, which are completely owned by governments. Far from bringing chaos, the anarchic portions of our lives are usually the most peaceful and orderly parts of them. So, when someone asks me "what do you want, anarchy?" I feel completely justified in saying "I can only hope."

April 15, 2009

Robert A. Wicks [send him mail] is a Unix administrator in Atlanta.

Anarchy does not merely mean 'absence of police.'  Anarchy's primary meaning is 'a state of disorder.'  I was born an raised through my formative years in an  all-Black community, and I would not describe it as anarchy.  

I know that I cannot speak for every African American community pre-integration, but when I was growing up in my all-Black community, everything we needed was within that community, grocery store, resturaunt, schools, laundry, soda shop, music shop, teachers, skilled artisans, church, etc.  You really rarely had to leave your own community for everyday things.  Most Black men had skills in carpentry, brick mansonry, etc., a lot of Black people still grew their own food (or knew the one that did), owned their own home and kept their children in check.

The African American community began the decline into anarchy (disorder) with every year of integration, from what I can see and remember. This study decline was due to the worse mistake Black people made in America, and that was to try to emulate everything the white man did; not just to good, but the most negative as well.  Once drugs entered into the African American community, it brought a cloud of doom over it that still lingers to this day.  

Anyway, I think ANARCHY is the wrong term to use to describe pre-integration African American communities, or to generalize them all being even today.
What does CONSERVATIVE mean?

I don't think the word means the same thing before the Depression as it did afterwards.

I am not sure it means the same thing when applied to White people before the 70s versus since then.

I consider Mandatory Accounting to be CONSERVATIVE but I have never heard any Conservatives advocate it.  Or Liberals or Communists or Anarchistsso I guess it needs some other name.  Von Tzu Anti-Socialism. 

Xum
Reference:
I consider Mandatory Accounting to be CONSERVATIVE but I have never heard any Conservatives advocate it.  Or Liberals or Communists or Anarchistsso I guess it needs some other name.  Von Tzu Anti-Socialism.
Mandatory accounting is rather progressive. Something like basing education on the Western Canon would be conservative.
Reference:
What does CONSERVATIVE mean? I don't think the word means the same thing before the Depression as it did afterwards. I am not sure it means the same thing when applied to White people before the 70s versus since then.

This is true, however, what conservative means now began to take shape right before and during the Reagan years, and culminated into what it now means once Reagan refused to denounce his endorsement by the Klu Klux Klan during his bid for the presidency.  His weak half-hearted denunciation after his election was too little too late and more likely disingenuously made.  The term 'conservative' became (and still is) code for white racist, especially once that the United States Congress became invested with blatant, unapologetic southern white racist, most of whom actually won elections by running racist campaigns that spewed racist rhetoric directed at Black people (and minorities).  Of course the republican party still tries to claim that the term "conservative," when it comes to them supposedly is in the context of its original meaning.
The African American community began the decline into anarchy (disorder) with every year of integration, from what I can see and remember. This study decline was due to the worse mistake Black people made in America, and that was to try to emulate everything the white man did; not just to good, but the most negative as well.  Once drugs entered into the African American community, it brought a cloud of doom over it that still lingers to this day.  

Anyway, I think ANARCHY is the wrong term to use to describe pre-integration African American communities, or to generalize them all being even today.---sunnubian

This (observation) is important.

I tend to agree.

Repression of African America has always been 'orderly'.

Violence has also, and always, been inherent in that orderliness.

Our African American communities were absorbed...assimilated...into the 'greater society'.

That resulted from 'Integration'.

We, as African American-Americans, were ill-equipped/prepared to function competitively.

We got what we asked for.

We didn't know how to use that newly-acquired 'societal latitude'.

As for 'the worst' mistake, I think taking authority over the pejorative term 'black', and making it the identity for Americans of unknown African ancestry has to be a very, very close competitor.

Our continuing greatest failure is to continue to fail to declare our identity in a manner that is at parity with all the other human societal groups on the planet.

PEACE

Jim Chester
Reference:
Anarchy does not merely mean 'absence of police.'  Anarchy's primary meaning is 'a state of disorder.'  I was born an raised through my formative years in an  all-Black community, and I would not describe it as anarchy.
The political definition of Anarchy is not defined as a state of disorder. I'd love for you to provide an example of this. Anarchism is the lack of the state, a governing body. Anarchy can be chaotic or orderly depending on the population.
{{{   Garvey argued that blacks had rendered themselves unworthy of the white man's respect. "The greatest stumbling block in the way of progress in the race has invariably come from within the race itself," wrote Garvey. "The monkey wrench of destruction as thrown into the cog of Negro Progress, is not thrown so much by the outsider as by the very fellow who is in our fold, and who should be the first to grease the wheel of progress rather than seeking to impede." Decades later, Malcolm X echoed that sentiment, faulting blacks for failing to take charge of their destinies. "The white man is too intelligent to let someone else come and gain control of the economy of his community," Malcolm said. "But you will let anybody come in and take control of the economy of your community, control the housing, control the education, control the jobs, control the businesses, under the pretext that you want to integrate. No, you're out of your mind."   }}}

That is PART of the key right there.  But I don't understand why the palefaces practically gave the transistor to the Japanese.  I suppose at the time no one knew how important it would become.  There is too much behind the scenes economic power gaming going on.

But Garvey wrote before PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE became a factor at all.  I never heard of Malcolm X saying anything about it.  John Kenneth Galbraith was one of the few big name economists who mentioned it and that was in 1959, only 6 years before Malcolm was assassinated.  It had not become really obvious yet to the man on the street.  In the 60s the economy mostly looked good and getting better.  Certainly to all of the palefaces.

But it ain't the 60s anymore.  Now we have planned obsolescence in computers.  How do people that don't know technology figure out what is going on?  But who gives a damn about the respect of the White morons.  One White man with some real brains figures out something great and 1000 White morons jump up and shout "see how intelligent WE are."  These people are using knowledge to play power games against each other.  Most of what is going on is information hiding.  We could short circuit their educational system by just telling each other about the really GOOD BOOKS.  But most of the time we are more stingy with knowledge than they are.

Xum
Most of what is going on is information hiding.  We could short circuit their educational system by just telling each other about the really GOOD BOOKS.  But most of the time we are more stingy with knowledge than they are.---Xum

I understand your concern for 'the (electronic) information-use gap).

I am coming to the conclusion that 'we' are (still) skittish about information as it applies to 'us'.

We are still learning how to use information that is specific to us.

We are particularly 'skittish' when the origin of the information originates with one of us.

Therefore, building a language for our community for use within our community becomes a great challenge, and very difficult to achieve.

PEACE

Jim Chester

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post
×
×
×
×