As  approaches birthday number four, we once
again find ourselves at odds with Harvard University. In this issue's Freedom
Rider column, Margaret Kimberely writes about self hatred at
the venerable institution.
Nothing can ruin a Sunday morning like a New
York Times magazine article with a dubious title such as, “Toward
a Unified Theory of Black America.” The alarm bells are immediate
because the Times loves to give attention to black people who
are either in jail or on welfare or who have impeccable credentials
but who are horribly confused.
The New York Times, a mechanism of systematic
exclusion, chose not to print the following letter about the
so-called "Unified
Theory of Black America" from one of the most eminent Black
thinkers of our era, Harvard professor, Dr. Martin Kilson.
The New York Times Magazine Lexington, Mass.
229 West 43d St. 02421
New York, N.Y. March 22, 2005
Sir:
I thought Stephen Dubner’s article “Toward a Unified Theory
of Black America” (March 20) was quite strange. I was expecting
an account of the ideas comprising the young African-American
economist Roland Fryer’s unified theory of Black America, but
Dubner does not do this. Instead Dubner’s article relates how
a talented African-American youth overcame a difficult childhood
and teenage hood to achieve a doctorate in economics and a three-year
fellowship at Harvard. When Dubner does inform us about Fryer’s
ideas, I found them quite astonishing. “I basically want to figure
out where blacks went wrong,” Fryer tells Dubner. How can Fryer
possibly achieve a “unified theory of Black America” by posing
this historically vapid question.?
It was America and its racist system that
went wrong, Professor Fryer! What about over two-hundred years
of American slavocracy
and a century of authoritarian and terrorist-riddled White supremacist
practices that systematically denied African-Americans’ human
rights and basic citizenship rights like voting and equal opportunity
in America’s overall socio-economic life? Curiously, Fryer considers
his “where blacks went wrong” vantage point intellectually courageous
because 1) he thinks “Blacks and whites are both to blame” – in
equal measure presumably – and because 2) he thinks genetic explanations
should be studied, telling Dubner that “As soon as you say something
like, ‘Well could the black-white test- score gap be genetics?’ everybody
gets tensed up. But why shouldn’t that be on the table.?” It
shouldn’t be on the table for the very same reason that the Creationist
view of the universe shouldn’t be on the table or the neo-Fascist
view of the Holocaust shouldn’t be on the table – they’re wrong.
Finally, Roland Fryer suggests in his interview
with Dubner that he is a legitimate disciple of W.E.B. DuBois.
I disagree.
DuBois would not have endorsed Fryer’s thinking, such as discouraging
African-American families from giving children Black-ethnic names.
By the way, does Fryer discourage Irish-ethnic names, Jewish-ethnic
names, Italian-ethnic names, etc.? Nor would DuBois attack affirmative
action practices. DuBois favored public policy experimentation
in order to reverse the oppressive legacy of American racism.
Sincerely,
Martin Kilson
Frank G. Thomson Professor of Government
Emeritus – Harvard University
Dr. Kilson has been a contributing thinker
to since our second issue. Kilson received his BA degree from
Lincoln University, Pennsylvania,
and his PhD from Harvard University, where he taught from 1962
to 1998. He was the first Black granted full tenure at Harvard.
Kilson is a Frank G. Thomson Research Professor, Harvard, and his
two-volume study, "The Making of Black Intellectuals," a
22-year labor of love, will be published this year.
Dr. Kilson's three-part series, "Probing the Black Elite's
Role for the 21st Century," begins April 7 in .
Freedom Rider Fan Mail
From Baltimore, Maryland, reader Gwen Barbour
felt right at home with Margaret Kimberley's piece "Bread
and Circuses".
As I read Margaret Kimberlys commentary it
was as though she had been sitting in on the discussions my
family members, friends
and I have been having over the past few days. She is as usual
right on target and her "take no prisoners" hard hitting
prose needs to be read by every thinking person in this country.
We are in deep trouble because far to many
of us swallow the misinformation dished out by the "popular "media
but are too lazy or too complacent to seek out alternate sources
like .
I have referred all of my relatives and friends
to the website. Thank you for all the hard work you do to
bring us the unvarnished
truth. When you get discouraged by the immensity of the task
that lies before you just remember that "truth crushed to
earth will rise again".
Margaret also rang the bell for M. Hureaux in Seattle.
On point as ever. Your stuff reads with the same sort of lyrical
rage one finds in the works of Jayne Cortez.
Keep laying it down and tearing it up.
Picking on the worst of them
Our cover story this week answers readers who demand we call more
people out and push us to name names. This week's target is the
subject of our cover story: "The
Worst Black Congressperson - David Scott" should make such
readers drool.
The other criticism we hear about from time to time falls into
the category of wanting to provide solutions. Here's some of
what John Wilson of Washington, DC wrote on that subject.
I always find insightful, and thought provoking reading.
There is a consistent theme that I have observed with your writing,
as well as most of the progressive movement, that I would like
to point out.
Consistently, your writing lacks solutions. You wrote a great piece about
the grand plan of Mr. bush, and the right wing thought police's strategy
to use the Black church and vouchers as entry into the Black community bypassing
the local leadership.
The unfortunate reality is most African American elected officials are viewed
as ineffective. Let me qualify by stating, I have worked in the Clinton Administration
as a political appointee, I have worked at HUD for then Secreatary Andrew
Cuomo, as well as having worked for Congresswoman Maxine Waters, among other
jobs, so I am hardwired into Democratic poltics, I can tell what you already
know, the DNC, DSCC, DCC, DGA, and most of the democratic machinary do not
have a plan!
They don't have a comprehensive, cohesive, plan, and certianly
not one that includes Black people (I'll talk about this dangerous
group known as "progressives" which
is usually code for white liberals who think they know what's best for us...
Whether Democrats or Republicans are in charge it shouldn't make a difference.
Depending on the party in charge, our strategy to accessing resources for
our community is the only thing that should change. I believe the key is
to have Black folks in the Republican Party, new people at the helm in the
Democratic Party, in the lobby shops, the associations, more think tanks
to influence the process, and to bring back resources to the community. At
the end of the day, the end user, the person in the community doesn't care
who provided the help, they simply need the help...
John Wilson has a lot of tracking and thinking to do especially
about his belief that it should not make a difference whether Democrats
or Republicans are in charge and labeling Maxine Waters ineffective.
We at are doing our best to provide ideas and plans for change.
However, we can not make up for the dearth of Black leadership
in the United States.
We hope all readers
will line up to buy the book Co-Publishers Glen Ford and Peter
Gamble have contracted
to write for The New
Press. The working title of the book is: "Barack Obama and
the Crisis in Black Leadership". Publication date is set for
April 5, 2006 which also happens to be the fourth anniversary of
.
Meanwhile, for readers who demand solutions, we cordially invite
a reading of our five
part series: "Wanted: A Plan for the Cities to Save Themselves".
A solution to the David Scott problem is simple. Folks represented
by him should organize and get rid of him at the ballot box. The
publishers of do not think very many of our readers need instructions
written in crayon on how to take action.
On the topic of public/broadcast forums hosted by , reader Ron
Gordon, supports the idea.
Dear Black Commentator: How are you? I read with great interest
the request by Rev. Jeanette Pollard that asked why Black Commentator
should not take the lead in assembling a forum somewhere to take
on those who would seek to destroy what is left of the slim veneer
of Black community spirit, pride, and dignity.
I see the "call" as an urgent one. While Black Commentator
does a more than adequately excellent job of getting the message
across to those
who are still conscious enough to read, listen, and perhaps act upon what
precious ideas are laid out here in the Black Commentator, more is respectfully
requested. Why?
There is no one that I can reasonably say that is "speaking truth to
power" like Black Commentator is today. That in and of itself is reason
enough, I believe, for Black Commentator to at least take a vanguard role,
just like many other great African American leaders have done down through
history such as Ida B. Wells-Barnett, David Walker, Frederick Douglas, et.
al.
Our enemies no longer hide like roaches in the night. No. They are everywhere.
It would also seem to me that time is illusory, meaning that time is against
us as we wait to determine our next move(s). Contemplation means escalation
to our enemies.
Whatever conclusion Black Commentator arrives at with respect
to leading a challenging debate about contemporary issues affecting
the Black community,
this is my small attempt at "thanking you for just being there." You
keep the way illuminated. Peace.
Please know that we at are sincerely thankfull for all those
who write us letters of support and encouragement. People who constantly
demand change are not negative people. One must be filled with
hope to believe striving for social and economic justice is worthwhile.
Radio
You can visit the Radio
BC page to listen to any of our audio commentaries
voiced by Co-Publisher
and Editor-in-Chief, Glen Ford. We publish the text of the
radio commentary each week in this column.
Below is the script for the Radio BC audio
commentary of March 25 2005 entitled "Blacks and the Anti-War
Movement".
It was by far the largest anti-war march
in Harlem in recent times. On the second anniversary of
the invasion of Iraq,
between five and ten thousand people marched from Harlem’s
Marcus Garvey Park, along famed 125th Street,
down Malcolm X Boulevard, and on to Central Park. This was
a Black-led march, through very, very friendly territory – because
African Americans overwhelmingly oppose the war. Just as
they have opposed every U.S. military adventure since the
polling companies began paying attention to Black opinion.
So, why are whites, a majority of whom still support the
war in one form or another, in the forefront of the national
anti-war movement.
It’s a complex question, with many answers, all of them
related to white dominance in the society as a whole. We
at BlackCommentator.com think that a better question to ask
is, Why aren’t Blacks demonstrating in larger numbers about
a whole range of abominations committed by the Bush regime – not
just the Iraq war? That’s also a complex question, with lots
of answers. One of the answers, we are sure, lies in more
than three decades of mass Black incarceration, which has
virtually swept the streets clean of young Black males without
some kind of criminal justice entanglement. Mass movements
depend upon youth for energy and militancy. But if the youth
are shackled –literally, in jail – or in a practical sense,
by probation and parole restrictions, there is less critical
mass for public protest.
Another question that might get to the
heart of the issue is, Do Blacks and whites oppose the
war for somewhat different
reasons? The answer is, Yes. African Americans understand
the racist imperatives that American leaders harness every
time they want to steal something from people of color. As
Richard Pryor said, we’re the folks who rooted for the Indians
at the movies, and against the cowboys and the U.S. cavalry.
When it comes to American foreign policy, most Black folks
know the deal. In fact, it’s a no-brainer. “They” – the white
folks – are out to steal somebody’s stuff, again.
Most white opponents of
any given U.S. foreign adventure see things somewhat differently.
They tend to think
of these aggressions as mistakes, or the products of evil individuals
and corporations in power. These antiwar types believe that
most Americans would oppose these policies, if they only knew
the facts. White Americans tend to be embarrassed by the evil
behavior of their leaders, as if it reflects badly on the essential
goodness of the country. African Americans have no illusions
about the actual moral character of the United States – for
obvious historical reasons. And for those reasons, it
may be that many Blacks see little purpose in appealing to
the better angels of the white American conscience. Unfortunately,
only massive defeat will cause most Americans to demand an
immediate withdrawal from Iraq. And that will have nothing
to do with compassion for Iraqis, or recognition of their absolute
right not to be occupied. In Harlem, they demanded that U.S.
Troops Get Out Now, unconditionally. That is the only Moral
position. For Radio BC, I’m Glen
Ford.
We thank each of you very much for your readership. Please keep
writing.
gratefully
acknowledges the following Websites for sending visitors our way
(listing is in no particular order):
http://www.commondreams.org
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info
http://www.bartcop.com
http://membersf.blackplanet.com
http://buzzflash.com
http://www.democraticunderground.com
http://www.cursor.org
http://www.liberaloasis.com
http://www.villagevoice.com |
