I think Hillary Clinton would benefit from watching this series in light of her recent comments. It’s a great video and really gave me some interesting incite on how white people perceive [or don’t perceive] white privilege.
“Mirrors of Privilege: Making Whiteness Visible is a brilliant documentary and a must-see for all people who are interested in justice, spiritual growth and community making. It features the experiences of white women and men who have worked to gain insight into what it means to challenge notions of racism and white supremacy in the United States.”
Filed under academic, african american, black men, black women, change, community, interracial, opinion, race, slavery, society, video, white folks, youtube
An article from South African writer Fikile-Ntsikelelo Moya aka the F-Word aka one of my new heroes.
From Mail and Guardian – Racism goes beyond lynching niggers
One Sunday afternoon the news editor at my previous paper sent me to cover a dog show at Gilloolies Farm, east of Johannesburg. When I got there the woman behind the ticket counter ignored me and routinely focused on people who came after me.
When she did pay attention to me she asked me: “What are you here to deliver?” In her mind the idea of a black guy enjoying the sight of dogs jumping through hoops was a bridge too far.
The woman and the people she paid attention to were white. I was (and still am) black. I called her action racist and people who commit racist actions, racists.
I might have been wrong. Perhaps the lady at the dog show is a nice woman who has never said an unkind word about people of other hues.
But that is where part of the problem lies.
Somehow we have developed the idea that unless you lynch niggers in a plantation or bang the heads of uppity black detainees against the prison walls until they die you are not really a racist.
Hold on, not even beating up darkies qualifies as racism. As one Pumas rugby team supporter, JR Nagel, told The Times when asked his opinion about the team fielding Gert van Schalkwyk (not to be confused with the Kaizer Chiefs midfielder of the same name) who is on appeal after he and his friends were convicted of beating a black man to death. “We all, even myself … my chommies [friends] and I have beaten up a couple of kaffirs. You are young, that’s what you do. In those days your dad told you that’s kwaai [cool].
“The only reason this is an issue is because it’s a kaffir who died and it was a white laaitie [boy] who hit him,” Nagel said.
Granted, the last statement reflects the unique idiocy of the speaker rather than a general trend of thought. Still, the unfortunate reality is that there is simply too little respect by our white compatriots for black people’s sensitivities to colonialism and racism. Or they are just too shy to show it. Continue reading
Filed under africa, african american, angry, black, black history, black man, civil rights, culture, global, injustice, news, opinion, race, racism, slavery, society, white folks
This has to be one of the most disgusting, horrible thing I’ve seen. I’m so so so so so glad that someone exposed these racist @ssholes. Planned Parenthood of both New Mexico and Oklahoma accepts money from a racist donor to target African Americans for abortions because “there are way too many blacks in America”. Please pass it on!!! We pass around crazy stuff via email…pass this video around to all your friends…especially parents, teenaged girls and young women!!!
Click here for part one of this video (Idaho and Ohio calls). These are not secretaries or administrative staff talking on the phone with this guy. He’s talking to a Director of Grants and a Vice President of Development who were more than happy to tell him that his money would go towards the destruction of another black baby!! That just sick, but I’m not surprised. The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger was a believer in eugenics and many have called her a racist who believed blacks were inferior.
Even Rush Limbaugh has spoken on it, and for once he makes a good point. Continue reading
The New Yorker did an interesting (LONG) piece about how Jeremiah Wright’s style of ministry is part of a lineage of black liberation and deliverance. Here’s a lil taste. You should read the whole thing…it’s 6 pages online – http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/04/07
As millions of people with no particular interest in African-American religious institutions now know, Trinity is home to the Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. Since March 13th, when “Good Morning America” broadcast clips of Wright at his most incendiary, he has been an unlikely political celebrity, half of an American odd couple: the fiery, noisy, sixties-influenced spiritual adviser to a Presidential candidate who is supposed to be cool, quiet, and new. Wright’s greatest hits found a home on the Internet and on cable news. There are those seven words he uttered, days after September 11th: “America’s chickens? Are coming home! To roost.” And there’s the way he rewrote a classic Irving Berlin lyric: “Not ‘God bless America.’ ‘God damn America!’ ” But by the time the scandal broke Wright was already gone. He had announced his retirement at the age of sixty-six, preaching his last sermon at Trinity on February 10th, and he kept out of sight while the controversy deepened.
On Good Friday, the church held its annual “Seven Last Words of Christ” service, featuring seven sermons from as many guest preachers. Trinity calls itself “unashamedly black and unapologetically Christian,” but the preacher who was marvelling at all those white people was himself white: Father Michael Pfleger, the leader of the Faith Community of St. Sabina, also on Chicago’s South Side, which proclaims itself to be an “African-American Catholic church.” For one of the historic African-American churches, such a proclamation would be gratuitous, but Pfleger’s church, like Wright’s, belongs to a denomination in which African-Americans are a small minority. The insistence on race is, in part, an assertion of self-determination, a declaration that no church is culturally neutral… Continue reading
Filed under activism, african american, black, black history, black man, christian, church, civil rights, culture, drama, history, news, obama, opinion, society, white folks
It seems that both Reps and Dems are targeting the Hispanic vote, especially in Texas. The past has taught me that this kind of attention comes with strings and neglected promises. African Americans have experienced let downs by Democrats and Republicans alike when it comes to candidates coming to our communities and pledging to represent us. Some great examples can be found in Randall Kennedy’s book “Nigger: The Strange Career of a Troublesome Word” which traces the use of the epithet and notes its use by Presidents Truman, Johnson and Nixon. There have been ups and downs, but in the end allegiance to one party is not the key to any race’s advancement in America.
It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism.
Because of recent scandals involving Strom Thurmond, people are familar with the term Dixiecrats. There is more than enough evidence that there were Democrats who fought against the movement of African Americans having equal civil rights and civil liberties. This is quite clear.
When it comes to Republicans, I thank their forefathers for their role in the emancipation of my ancestors, however their hands are dirty as well. In the year 2008, the Republican party is far from “preferred” status in the African American community. The Regan Years had a lot to do with that. Who can forget the Jesse Helms “White Hands” ad that focused on racial quotas.
One should also note the “Southern Strategy” used by Richard Nixon. Continue reading
Filed under activism, african american, angry, black, civil rights, government, history, injustice, news, opinion, politics, race, racism, white folks
Before Obama and Clinton, there was Douglas and Stanton…
Blacks and women have typically shared — in their fight for the vote, non-discrimination and economic equality — give way to the nitty-gritty of reaching consensus, setting policy, passing legislation and, in the case of elections, making choices.
One bitter case from the 19th century involved a split between the abolitionist Frederick Douglass and the women’s rights’ pioneer Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Stanton was herself a fervent abolitionist, and a close ally of Douglass, who later confined herself to the cause of women’s equality. These ideals would eventually clash, resulting in increasingly divisive rhetoric that reached a harsh climax after Stanton condemned the 15th amendment — which gave black men the right to vote but left out women of all races — as something that would establish “an aristocracy of sex on this continent.” She also alluded to the “lower orders” like Irish, blacks, Germans, Chinese.
During a heated meeting in New York City’s Steinway Hall in 1869, Stanton wondered, “Shall American statesmen … so amend their constitutions as to make their wives and mothers the political inferiors of unlettered and unwashed ditch-diggers, bootblacks, butchers and barbers, fresh from the slave plantations of the South?” At which point, Douglass rose, paid tribute to Stanton’s years of work on civil rights for all, and replied, “When women, because they are women, are hunted down through the cities of New York and New Orleans; when they are dragged from their houses and hung from lampposts; when their children are torn from their arms and their brains dashed out upon the pavement; when they are objects of insult and rage at every turn; when they are in danger of having their homes burnt down… then they will have an urgency to obtain the ballot equal to our own.”
Blacks won the right to vote with the 15th Amendment in 1870; women won theirs with the 19th Amendment, in 1920, a half-century later. Each of their causes would stutter-step along at sometimes different paces, but usually in some loose if not formal concert.
Source: New York Times
Filed under academic, activism, african american, black, black man, change, civil rights, culture, government, law, race, racism, slavery, women
This movie may be quite simply the most shocking, screamingly offensive blaxploitation movie of all time!!! is an unabashedly incendiary look at race relations in America during the early seventies that’s guaranteed to leave your jaw on the floor. This movie has it’s flaws, as critics like Robert Ebert have pointed out. However, I rank it right up there with Sankofa on the scale of movies that illuminate the horror, the absolute inhumane nature of the institution of slavery…no sugar coating.
The Italian filmmaking team of Gualtiero Jacopetti and Franco Prosperi’s 1971’s GOODBYE UNCLE TOM (a.k.a. ADDIO ZIO TOM) (view it here) is an epic that puts the team’s documentary background to good use and outdoes all their other films in sheer outrageousness. Some would say that this pseudo-documentary is arguably the most shocking (yet effective) cinematic treatment of slavery and its consequences, surpassing all the others–ROOTS, MANDINGO, DRUM, AMISTAD, ILL-GOTTEN GAINS, BELOVED and MANDALAY. Well, I can say that this movie has something to anger just about anyone. Want to see it…there are some clips available on YouTube (I think the whole movie is on Google Movies). Here are some comments from others.
I thought this site summed it up well…
The movie is filmed as if modern filmmakers took a trip the antebellum south and recorded what they saw there, with an emphasis on the most inhuman stuff they could find. So, we get to see rape, torture, children being sold as sex toys, beatings, and just about everything else you can think of. Even when there are not massive amounts of violence on the screen, it’s still pretty disturbing. There’s a shot of a little white girl and a little black boy running through a field together; after a little while you realize the girl has the boy on a leash. And about every five minutes, there’s someone prattling on about the inferiority of blacks people. Much of the dialog comes from the actual letters and documents of time, so at least there’s some devotion to historical accuracy. I’m not sure how accurate everything else is, but even if only 10 percent of it is true, it would still be absolutely horrible.
In the end, Goodbye, Uncle Tom is not so much a racist movie as it is a completely tasteless movie. It’s like watching a John Waters-directed version of Black Like Me – whatever lessons about racism there are to be learned, they’ll be overshadowed by the scenes of transvestites getting hit in the face with colostomy bags. I have no problems with a discussion of race relations or the horrors of slavery, but bringing a Jerry Springer-type sensibility to it is a really bad idea. The movie stands as a testament to good intentions gone completely awry.
Robert Ebert says…
The movie gloats over scenes of human degradation. And this time there isn’t even the excuse of documentary; every scene in this movie was specifically staged. Unfortunately, Jacopetti and Prosperi have been able to find people willing to undergo the humiliation inflicted on them in “Farewell Uncle Tom“; most of the blacks in the film are apparently Africans forced by poverty and need to do these things for a few days’ pitiful wages.
This is cruel exploitation. If it is tragic that the barbarism of slavery existed in this country, is it not also tragic — and enraging — that for a few dollars the producers of this film were able to reproduce and reenact that barbarism?
Make no mistake. This movie itself humiliates its actors in the way the slaves were humiliated 200 years ago. A man without a hand is photographed shoving mash into his mouth from a trough. Very young girls are mocked in auction scenes. Pregnant women — women who are really pregnant — are corralled into a scene about the “breeding” of slaves. The fact that this film could find a booking in a legitimate motion-picture theater is depressing.
You can read the rest of Robert Ebert’s take here.
Filed under abuse, africa, african american, angry, art, black man, black women, crime, culture, drama, global, internet, media, negro, opinion, race, racism, slavery, society, video, youtube