Skip to main content

Why is that?

Clearly, NAN (National Action Network) is a political party. Isn't that the party for which Rev. Al Sharpton was the candidate?

I/We see NAN in the same context as Rainbow/PUSH Coalition.

We seldom, if ever, talk about it; certainly not this forum.

There is an anonymity about NAN; a 'distancing' from African America even with Rev. Sharpton as its chairman.

Is NAN the version of a political party, with its implied anonymity, we need?

PEACE

Jim Chester
I am one for always yelling for a party for African America.

I forgot all about NAN.

Why don't we see NAN as a political party, and an African American-American political party at that?
African Americans for African America http://iaanh2.org African American Pledge of Unity We stand, Together, after left alone in a land we never knew. We Bind ourselves, Together, with the blood and will of Those who have gone before. From the Bodies of our Ancestors thrown away, from the Pieces of Ourselves left to perish, We rise as One, a New Body in a New Land, a New People in a New Nation. Of Common Mind, Body, and Spirit, By Declaration of our Amalgamated Individual and Personal Authorities, We Are African America. © James Wesley Chester 2004; 2008 You are who you say you are. Your children are who you say you are.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:

Clearly, NAN (National Action Network) is a political party. Isn't that the party for which Rev. Al Sharpton was the candidate?

I/We see NAN in the same context as Rainbow/PUSH Coalition.


IMO - there is a clear difference between an organization and a party. I don't see either NAN or PUSH as 'political parties' per se, although they are involved in issues that reach into the realm of politics.
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:

Clearly, NAN (National Action Network) is a political party. Isn't that the party for which Rev. Al Sharpton was the candidate?

I/We see NAN in the same context as Rainbow/PUSH Coalition.


IMO - there is a clear difference between an organization and a party. I don't see either NAN or PUSH as 'political parties' per se, although they are involved in issues that reach into the realm of politics.


Precisely.

So, what ticket did Al Sharpton run on?

Democrat?

He was on the stage with Democrats.

The answer to the question then is: Because NAN is not a political party, just as is true for rainbow/PUSH.

Do you agree that we need a party dedicated, first, to assuring our needs?

PEACE

Jim Chester
I think the reason we don't see NAN as a political party is because it isn't one. It is more of a social organization ... with an objective to promote the African American perspective.

Rev. Al ran as a Democratic candidate. I'm not so sure he would want to turn his organization into a political party anymore than Rev. Jesse would/does. As organizations, they are able to do more grass-roots type of work. Making it exclusively political would conflict with that.

I do believe we need our own party. In fact, I'm a very strong advocate for it. To me, it's the only way we will ever get listened to, politically speaking. But, I'm not so sure either of the good Reverends need to be the "leader" of it. Eek Eek
Well, I believe that we need a separate political party for a number of reasons, actually.

Firstly, because I believe it is important for us as a people to have strong political representation in order to really play in the big game of "politics" and be successful at it.

Secondly, I don't believe that either the Democrats nor the Republicans have/have had/will ever have our best interest at heart to the point where our specific issues are properly addressed.

Third, I think even if the Dems wanted to be more helpful to us, they are not ... well, let's just say they lack the ability to be able to do so. They are so ingrained in the political two-way tug-of-war with the Repubs, that real solutions to our real problems never get put on the table.

Next, I believe there needs to be an alternative to the two-party system in this country. There needs to be a viable third ... with someone not nearly as stiff as Ralph Nadar! Smile

Fifth, I think that in this day and age, most Black folks (in particular) as well as a number of other people (in general) are more "middle-of-the-road" or not as exclusively Democrat nor Republican in their way of thinking and in the daily occurrances of their lives. Politically, socially, personally, and professionally, we seem to lean towards a little of this and a little of that - a Dem/Repub/Conserv/Lib mix, as it were. I believe a third-party formed by us with our primarily basic interests in mind would attract others who are seeking the same common sense goals that I think we are after.

Therefore, I think it would help us to have a third-party alternative by expanding our options and allowing us to fomulate a comprehensive agenda that speaks to our interests and I think it would unite us as a community to actually get involved in the political process more readily if more of us thought we actually had a chance to be heard in the halls of government.
EbonyRose's list is right on the money.

Every reason is a major reason.

The big, big reason that should be added is that such a party, by its very exisitence, would immediately provide a voice that speaks for us.

It almost doesn't matter what that 'voice' says.

The very validity of the voice is political leverage that speaks with the authority of 35MM people.

The 35MM do not even have to be members.

Every State that receives the registration of the 'Your State' African American Committee will immediately have a dialogue in place with all of the other politico's in that State.

I am intimidated by the thought, but New Orleans has about provoked me to register the African American National Committee in the State of Pennsylvania.

That will serve the 1.5MM African American-Americans of our State.

The African American National Committee will issue charters for additional State, and Territorial Committees.

PEACE

Jim Chester
I agree with you Mr. Chester, except for one thing. I believe it is VERY important what that 'voice' says. It can't be another Rev. Al or Rev. Jesse situation where they speak and nobody listens.

Not that what they have to say is not important or doesn't speak to our situation. I think Sharpton did a very good job of articulating specific African American interests during his presidential campaign. He brought many issues out into the public. But for one, the powers that be only think we hold them up as our leadership, but when they see no one following, concluded that they do not have to take him seriously. And number two, that 'voice' cannot merely be asking for what we need, but has to be demanding about what want.

The only way that type of demanding can be effective is with, as you say, the "leverage that speaks witht he authority of 35MM people" behind it.

Politics is the White man's stronghold on everything in this country. Even big-business corporation uses it to advance their strangling grip on this society. Any real political powerplay would have to strong, would have to be serious, and with little room for compromise. Otherwise, we'd be laughed out of the game before we even got to the park!
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:

Politics is the White man's stronghold on everything in this country. Even big-business corporation uses it to advance their strangling grip on this society. Any real political powerplay would have to strong, would have to be serious, and with little room for compromise. Otherwise, we'd be laughed out of the game before we even got to the park!


Any thoughts on how, at 12%, a black third party could impact the power structure that you describe above?
Well, I'm not sure how to answer that because I'm not sure what the 12% represents. But, if you're speaking about in terms of the numbers of us at it relates to the population in this country, I don't think that really matters.

First of all, I'm not thinking that in establishing a "Black party" it will only be comprised of Black people or only supported by Black people or even that the only interests of such a party would be only that of Black concerns.

Secondly, it's not like what Black folks are seeking is something that only pertains to us as a race. Things like fairness, equality, justice, opportunity, are desires of a whole lot of people. Not just us. But, I happen to think that we can come up with a better idea of how to achieve those things than either one of the current two political parties seem to be able to. I also happen to think that that better idea would be appealing to 'others' ... especially those that have been riding our coat tails on the advances that we have already made thusfar.

I would venture to say that you and I probably have a different concept of what a "Black third party" is or would be. But my idea emcompasses an alternative third party, "created," as it were, based on the concepts of goals and ideals that would benefit us and our interests in ways that are not being done now. I actually don't think it would work to be exclusively Black. And it's certainly not something that could be put together overnight.

We're not going to just create a third party, groom a presidential candidate, win an election and then change the political landscape of the United States. But, we can created a political party, make inroads at the local and state levels, build up enough support to advance us forward ... and then take the country by storm! Smile

This is just my off the top of my head answer ... but, I may be able to have a little more comprehensive one for ya after I've thought about it a bit.
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:

But my idea emcompasses an alternative third party, "created," as it were, based on the concepts of goals and ideals that would benefit us and our interests in ways that are not being done now. I actually don't think it would work to be exclusively Black.


Well, the Founders of our country established a distinctly racist and classist system where only wealthy white males were fully functioning citizens of this nation. The residue of that thinking is still strongly with us today. I guess the most natural new party would be a party of the "have nots" - particularly since there are SO many more of them than the "haves". While the Dems give that group lip service, I'm not sure that they really deliver against their true core agenda. Obvisouly not - as poverty increases by the year in this country.

I tell you one thing though - whoever leads that group gets immediately "neutralized" by the powers that be - whether assassinated or thrown in jail or co-opted or whatever!
And number two, that 'voice' cannot merely be asking for what we need, but has to be demanding about what want.---EbonyRose

I does indeed matter what the 'voice' says. But, even when wrong, the political leverage of 35MM people goes on the scale of political decision making.

The very sound of such a voice IS a demand.

The organizational task is daunting. But the idea would catch on like wild fire.

If an African American Party can be established in one State, any State, it would be tatamount to lighting a match in a tenderbox. There would be a slow, but unstoppable 'burn' right across the country.

My early look into Pennsylvania makes it immediately clear making this happen will be no small task.

The CRITICAL first task is stgnature equal to a required minimum percentage of the last general election.

Hard-copy signatures.

On specified forms.

I still looking.


PEAC3

Jim Chester
I'm not thinking that in establishing a "Black party" it will only be comprised of Black people or only supported by Black people or even that the only interests of such a party would be only that of Black concerns.---EbonyRose

One of the first things we need to realize is that while such a party would be dedicated first to assuring the needs of African American-Americans, it CANNOT be named the 'Black Party'.

Beyond simply not being descriptive, such terminology carries an awful lot of 'bad baggage'.

I think at this stage of our 'healing', we are 'well' enough to publicly acknowledge that we Americans who are of unknown African ancestry are indeed African American; however that fits our respective belief systems


We're not going to just create a third party, groom a presidential candidate, win an election and then change the political landscape of the United States. But, we can created a political party, make inroads at the local and state levels, build up enough support to advance us forward ... and then take the country by storm!---EbonyRose

The African American National Committee would be inundated with non-African Americans.

That will present a problem that must be considered the party's original construction. Such a device will be one of the first means chosen to 'sink' the new party; form within.

I know you are speaking, in part, tongue-in-cheek, but I truly believe that once established in each State the structure of the House of Representatives would be changed within two election cycles.

We would have at least six Senators of African ancestry one full election cycle of the Senate (6 years).

And I like the 'top of your head'.


Our cause is just. I think once we get it together, we would receive all the help we needed to implement it in a positive way---EbonyRose

I heartily agree.

The Africn American Party would exist specifically to first assure the needs of African American-Americans.

This IS NOT to say such assurance is to be to the detriment of the nation.

Speaking of history, MBM, Africa America has always been asked to wait, to step aside for the greater good, to be patient, to take less, etc.

The African American Party forces that to stop.

European America would not now have to ask, 'What do you people want?'

They can simply read the party platform.

The rest is negotiation.

Not a request...please suh.


PEACE

Jim Chester
I have decided to 'test the waters' to see if there are Pennsylvanians who would be interested in creating a 'mambership group' for registering a Pennsylvania African American Party.

All Americans of unknown African ancestry interested in establishing such a group can notify me with their residential contact information at: plus39@adelphia.net

Residential information is a legal require for a valid registration of a member of a political party. That information MUST be the actual residence of the person to be acceptable.

The State's evaluation committee will be looking us with very critical eyes.

PEACE

Jim Chester
You know, JWC ....

As unfortunate as it is, I seriously doubt that you are going to receive the response you seek under the name you have chosen for it. You will exclude the support of millions of non-African Americans who will simply not climb under the umbrella of a party named African-American anything. This country is not even close to ready for anything remotely close to that yet. Frown

Additionally, I haven't really given thought to the thought of individual state parties culminating into a national program. Perhaps it could work! But, I'm thinking it would need to start off as a national endeavor with an eye, at least in the beginning, at targeting specific individual states as the kindling to this fire you speak of.

In a perfect world, my concept would be to perhaps hijack the Independent Party (as it is already established), conform it with a platform of our own, initiate a campaign to redirect the membership of AAs and other like-minded individuals, and then use those numbers and that leverage to start making gains at the local and then state levels, and use that to catapult a natioanl initiative.

But again, that's what happens in the perfect world that's contained in my head! Smile
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
You know, JWC ....

As unfortunate as it is, I seriously doubt that you are going to receive the response you seek under the name you have chosen for it. You will exclude the support of millions of non-African Americans who will simply not climb under the umbrella of a party named African-American anything. This country is not even close to ready for anything remotely close to that yet. Frown

I think I know what you are saying. But the question then becomes, 'How long am I/we willing to wait?'

And...who am I/we waiting for?

Who are those millions? Admittedly, the numbers needed are large. I envision the desired group being African American-Americans. I would spend no money, and very little time trying to persuade Europeans.

The goal is to establish the party.


Additionally, I haven't really given thought to the thought of individual state parties culminating into a national program. Perhaps it could work! But, I'm thinking it would need to start off as a national endeavor with an eye, at least in the beginning, at targeting specific individual states as the kindling to this fire you speak of.

I thought I would regret using language like 'fire'.

Without the expectation, the goal would be/is to establish ONE registered party in ONE State. I selected Pennsylvania only because that is where I am.

I therefore limited my solicitation for e-mail to Pennsylvania. I am sure other methods and avenues have to be used.


In a perfect world, my concept would be to perhaps hijack the Independent Party (as it is already established), conform it with a platform of our own, initiate a campaign to redirect the membership of AAs and other like-minded individuals, and then use those numbers and that leverage to start making gains at the local and then state levels, and use that to catapult a natioanl initiative.

I am not that politically sophisticated. Novice does not begin to describe me. The idea of a ready-made membership does have a 'ring' to it.

I will never make a politician. I am too short on patience to persuade others.

Someone else would ultitmately have to take on that job. I am not eager to be the 'head' of a political party.

I am doing this because no one else will.

I would not want to inherent the baggage attendant to an existing political organization; not to mention that of the existing membership.

I didn't know there was an actual Independent Party.


But again, that's what happens in the perfect world that's contained in my head! Smile


I hear you, and as you know African America does not operate in that 'perfect world.'

I an trying to hold this to what is do-able. Now. I perceive the job happening one State at a time.

One State is success.

And as much by me as possible, since I have not recruited anyone else, thus far.

When I think membership, I think African American.

Others will come, if they want.

PEACE

Jim Chester
quote:
Originally posted by Frenchy:
IMO, the problem is that too many people do not vote their conscience. They use their vote to block someone else from winning, even if the candidate they vote for is not much better than the one they hate. That will continue to be the death knell for any "new" party.


There is always a reason.

EbonyRose also mentioned that 'millions' are not ready for a party carrying the name 'African American.'

Curiously, most of those same 'millions' label themselves with that name.

Those same 'millions' have not problem wearing the label our society's color-based system finessed us into, 'black'.

There is always a reason.

An African American Party would not be simply about the vote.

A political party is about power.

From the moment of its inception.

Clearly, our minds, as a people are not yet matured sufficiently to deal with the ownership of power.

We will therefore continue to be use.

Smiling and thankful.

P.S. It occurs to me that if you are right in concluding that a 'new' party fails because the lack of a quality difference in the candidates, what do you see as a solution.

It also occurs to me that the system has been massaged to not allow distinctiveness in candidates to survive.

You may know that at one time the nnomination of a candidate was a convention floor process. Television audiences used to show for work bleery-eyed from staying up to watch 'floor fights' at national conventions.

It was in such an atmosphere that Fannie Lou Hammer made her stand to be seated.

'By 1964 she was already an established civil rights activist in the U.S. That year she helped found the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party(MFDP). The initial goal of MFDP was to try to change the political platform in Mississippi by getting more blacks involved in the political process.'

You should note that Ms Hamer's demand was to be seated as a delegate. It was a Democrat National Convention.

She had founded a distinct, and separate Democrat Party, the Mississippi Freedom Democrat Party.

She took her seat in the Mississippi Delegation, and would not move.

The Democrat Party had no authority over her, or her party.

The public eye was too strong to deny.

Fannie Lou Hamer was a distinct difference.

She did not win because she had numbers.

She won because she had AUTHORITY without permission.

An African American Party will be about AUTHORITY without permission.

P.P.S. I had to leave shortly.

We, as a people, truly have difficulty with the systems we live in. Much of that difficulty is because we don't understand how the system works.

There CANNOT be a difference in the candidates because must first reach concensus between them to 'win the hearts and minds' of the general public.

That 'meeting in the middle' produces tweedle-dum and tweedle-dee.

The difference is squeezed out.

A different/new party is the only way to make a difference in the system.

That party being dedicated to including assurance of the needs of African America sets a new paradigm for our society.

It will be hard work.


PEACE

Jim Chester
Last edited {1}

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×