RSS

Category Archives: The New Jim Crow

Reports of Jim Crow’s demise are a bit premature…

The Southern Myth – How Slavery Became Pleasant

I remember this from my segregated primary school 3rd Grade textbook, which is the one mentioned in the article below. When I first attended an integrated school in 7th Grade, the textbook in the previously all white school quoted almost verbatim the Southern Myth about slavery. My refusal to be tested and graded on anything which was gross historical lie, or to sit in class while it was being taught caused a bit of an uproar. I actually remember one white girl saying in class how well the slaves were treated, and how happy they were…That lasted up until I mentioned Denmark Vesey and Nat Turner (We didn’t know about Gabriel Prosser yet as much of what would become Black History had been erased from the textbooks and had to be rediscovered). and The teacher challenged me to provide material which contravened the information in the “official” Virginia History Book. My Dad, a historian had just completed a book on black history, replete with all the research and documentation from places like the Library of Congress…

I provided said information.

The Daughters of the Confederacy weren’t the last to attempt to rewrite History…Right wingers in Texas have even tried to erase figures like Cesar Chavez and the existence of black contributions to America. So the battle is ongoing.

Welcome to America. I now own your ass.

How Dixie’s History Got Whitewashed

The United Daughters of the Confederacy were once a powerful force in public education across the South, right down to rewriting history: slaves were happy, y’all.

Earlier this week Vanderbilt University announced that it would remove the word “Confederate” from the stone pediment at the entrance to a campus dormitory known as Memorial Hall. The decision brings to a close a long-standing dispute between the university and the Tennessee division of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, which provided the funds for the construction of the building and claimed naming rights in 1933. As part of the agreement, the school will pay the UDC $1.2 million or the present value of their initial $50,000 donation. This decision is the latest in a string of high-profile moves to remove Confederate iconography from public and private places as well as a reflection of the UDC’s long decline.

The women who founded the UDC in 1894 were committed to preserving and defending the memory of  Confederate soldiers and their cause. By World War I, membership in the UDC had reached roughly 100,000. While chapters were eventually established throughout the country, they remained most influential in the South, where they organized Decoration Day ceremonies, monument dedications, and raised money to support veterans in their old age. Their most important function, however, was the overseeing of how history was taught to the next generation on the high school and college levels. Students were expected to assume the responsibility of defending their ancestors once the generation that lived through the war had died. They did this primarily by authorizing textbooks for classroom use and rejecting those they deemed to be a threat to the memory of the Confederate soldier.

The UDC promoted histories that celebrated the Confederate cause by praising leaders like Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson and ignoring or re-interpreting the central cause of the war, namely slavery. Consider Susan Pendleton Lee’s 1895 textbook, A School History of the United States, in which she declared that although abolitionists had declared slavery to be a “moral wrong,” most Southerners believed that “the evils connected with it were less than those of any other system of labor.” “Hundreds of thousands of African savages,” according to the author, “had been Christianized under its influence—the kindest relations existed between the slaves and their owners.” It should come as no surprise that in her account of Reconstruction, the Ku Klux Klan was necessary “for protection against . . . outrages committed by misguided negroes.”

By the first decade of the 20th century and with the encouragement of the UDC, most Southern states established textbook commissions to oversee and recommend books for all public schools that provided a “fair and impartial” interpretation. These committees worked diligently to challenge publishers who stood to threaten the South’s preferred story of the war: “Southern schools and Southern teachers have prepared books which Southern children may read without insult or traduction of their fathers. Printing presses all over the Southland—and all over the Northland—are sending forth by thousands ones which tell the true character of the heroic struggle. The influence . . . of the South forbid[s] longer the perversion of truth and falsification of history.”…

…The effort made by the UDC to control history textbooks paid off immeasurably and continued to shape how Americans remembered the Civil War well into the 20th century. As late as the ’70s, the state of Virginia still used the popular textbook Virginia: History, Government, Geography by Francis B. Simkins, Spotswood H. Jones, and Sidman P. Poole, first published in 1957. Its chapter on slavery—“How the Negroes Lived under Slavery”—featured a well-dressed African-American family on board a ship shaking hands with a white man, who is presumed to be the family’s new owner. Here is how it describes slavery:

A feeling of strong affection existed between masters and slaves in a majority of Virginia homes . . . The house servants became almost as much a part of the planter’s family circle as its white members . . . The Negroes were always present at family weddings. They were allowed to look on at dances and other entertainments . . . A strong tie existed between slave and master because each was dependent on the other …  The slave system demanded that the master care for the slave in childhood, in sickness, and in old age. The regard that master and slaves had for each other made plantation life happy and prosperous.  Life among the Negroes of Virginia in slavery times was generally happy. The Negroes went about in a cheerful manner making a living for themselves and for those for whom they worked . . . But they were not worried by the furious arguments going on between Northerners and Southerners over what should be done with them. In fact, they paid little attention to these arguments.

My Dad always argued that black folks were the first non-Asian people to reach the Americas from Africa. He had visited Mexico and seen the statues of the Olmecs who ruled parts of what is now Mexico and Central America in 1700 BC. It is only about 1,000 miles by sea at the closest point between Africa and South America aided by the “Westerlies”. He believed that the great trading period starting about 7th Century was actually the second or third rise of trade and exploration in West Africa. Indeed it is now known as a result of that second/third trade period that the first known African migrated to live in England in the 13th Century, and there may have been trade between North Africa and Europe as early as the Vikings.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 20, 2016 in Black History, The New Jim Crow

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Implicit Bias – Training Law Enforcement to Be Less Racist

Since the early 90’s when books by Dinesh D’Souza and Jared Taylor hit conservative bookshelves, racism, and the pseudo science behind it have gone mainstream in the conservative world. Fox News picked up and found serial racism was profitable. It is safe to say than anyone you meet who watches Faux more than an hour a day…

Is a racist.

Faux News talking heads like Sean Hannity have built their entire careers around defending, encouraging, and promoting racism though implicit bias.

I think back a few weeks to the brother who murdered 5 Cops in Dallas. Stupid, stupid, stupid. First off, there was no evidence that any of the victims were either “bad cops” or criminal in any way. Killing the symptom, not the cause. If the brother was going to do some good in eradicating some of the racism in america – including the murder by cop of unarmed, innocent black men – he needed to shoot the hand behind the hand holding the gun. He needed to go to 1211 Avenue of the Americas in New York City, and shoot the first 5 talking heads emerging out of limousines.

Especially if 2 or 3 of those were the incessant purveyors of implicit racism.

It simply isn’t going to stop until the purveyors of racist trash know there is a cost to it. All the nice training courses discussed below won’t do a damn thing.

It is sort of like alcohol addiction. Alcohol is one of the, if not the hardest drug to kick. The reason? I would say in most cities it would be hard to walk a block though a commercial section without seeing a bar, a restaurant that serves alcohol, signs promoting alcoholic beverages. Turn on the TV – happy people consuming alcohol. Go to ball game – signs for alcohol everywhere, and dozens of places selling beer on draft (heck – there are even guys who will bring beer to your seat). Alcohol consumption is part of our social fabric. We are bombarded with messages hundreds of times a day promoting alcohol consumption.

Faux News and other conservative outlets do the same thing for racism. A good portion of their programming is devoted to promoting and advancing racism in the form of implicit bias.

So if you want to kill the implicit bias beast – you need to a lot better than a 2 hour slide show.

Implicit bias training seeks to counter hidden prejudice in law enforcement

When the Justice Department released its report on the Baltimore Police Department last week, examples of racial bias were clear:

The police:

— employs “enforcement strategies on African Americans, leading to severe and unjustified racial disparities”

— “disproportionately searches African-Americans during stops,” yet illegal items were found twice as often on white individuals during vehicle stops and 50 percent more during pedestrian stops

— arrests black people five times more than others for drug possession, yet black drug use is about the same or only slightly higher.

What is not so clear is the unseen, but not unfelt, implicit bias that provides the foundation for racism.

Most people carry some implicit bias, which Justice defines as “the unconscious or subtle associations that individuals make between groups of people and stereotypes about those groups.”

Justice and Baltimore agreed to reach a consent decree setting out needed reforms, including improved implicit bias training. At the same time, the Justice Department is launching a major effort for its own crew. All Justice law enforcement officers and prosecutors will undergo implicit bias training under a directive issued by Deputy Attorney General Sally Q. Yates and backed by her boss, Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch.

“We have been requiring implicit bias training in a lot of our consent decrees for local jurisdictions,” Lynch said in a brief interview following her appearance before a joint conference of the National Association of Black Journalists (disclosure: I am a member) and the National Association of Hispanic Journalists. “We really felt that if we were going to make that a prescription for local law enforcement, we should also be part of it.”

That means the department’s 23,000 law enforcement agents in four agencies and 5,800 lawyers are being trained in how to recognize implicit bias in their daily work.

Perhaps anticipating push back, Yate’s memo to staffers said “I know that your time is valuable, and that you already devote many hours to various training requirements, but I would not have asked you to take on this additional responsibility unless I and other Department leaders were convinced of its value.”

While the training will be geared to different elements in the department, all of it will begin with the science behind implicit bias, Yates said by telephone. “As you might expect, people can naturally start out a little defensive when they come into this kind of training.”

Yates, who has taken some training, said it’s important for employees to understand that implicit bias is distinct from explicit bias “and that it is something we all carry around unconsciously in one form or another.”

After the science, the training includes scenarios where implicit bias might kick in and strategies to counter it.

Strategies can include providing factual information to counter stereotypes. The Justice Department’s finding that contraband is found much more often among white folks, yet black people are stopped and searched at a higher rate is an example.

That information, perhaps, could have an impact on those who assume higher arrest rates mean black people are more criminally inclined. Studies have shown that black people are treated more harshly by the criminal justice system than white people for similar offenses at every step of the process.

“What the science also shows is that the most important aspect of countering implicit bias is being aware that you have it to begin with,” Yates said. “Most people don’t really recognize that they are carrying around the bias, particularly people who believe themselves to be fair-thinking, non-prejudice folks.”

I wonder if that fits Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation and a former Justice Department lawyer.

He thinks the department is going “to spend a lot of taxpayer money on training for a nonexistent problem.” Despite science to the contrary, von Spakovsky said, unconvincingly, “these claims are based on very dubious, questionable studies…the bias I saw there when I worked in the (DOJ’s) Civil Rights Division was towards whites.”

Perhaps he should talk with Lenese Herbert, a Howard University law professor.

Implicit bias training “represents cutting-edge research,” she said, “that may be enlisted to eradicate the internationally embarrassing and domestically destabilizing scourge of officers killing unarmed Black people in extraordinarily disproportionate numbers and in the face of shockingly nonviolent resistance.”

 

 
 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Larry Wilmore…Canceled

I guess Larry wasn’t “Fact Free” enough…Or white enough after his praise of President Obama.

Comedy Central Cancels Larry Wilmore’s Show

Comedy Central announced Monday it is canceling Larry Wilmore’s The Nightly Show, and the last episode will air Thursday. Comedy Central President Kent Alterman said the show has not been resonating with the cable channel’s audience. “Even though we’ve given it a year and a half, we’ve been hoping against hope that it would start to click with our audience, but it hasn’t happened and we haven’t seen evidence of it happening,” Alterman said. Wilmore recently headlined the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, where he was roundly criticized for using the n-word. Rory Albanese, a comedian who works on the show, tweeted Monday morning: “I’m very proud to have been a part of a show that has been funny, diverse & extremely necessary.”

 
 

Tags: , , , ,

Why Black Folks Hate the Chumph

Got into this a bit yesterday in the comments section. Maybe somebody was listening…

How bad is the Chumph loathed?

KKK Leader David Duke has more support among black folks.

No Group Loathes Donald Trump as Much as African Americans. Here’s Why.

The Republican nominee is no David Duke—since at least David Duke says what he means, while Trump just dog whistles.

There is almost no group left that Donald Trump hasn’t offended: Muslims, babies,women, Gold Star families, and of course Hispanics. Yet there is one group that despises Donald Trump more than any other: black Americans.

At an average of just 2 percent support in the polls, Trump is running fourth among black voters, as Harry Enten noted last week. He’s 84 points behind Hillary Clinton, but also trailing Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Jill Stein.

The findings of recent surveys read like an Onion headline or possibly a “Saturday Night Live” sketch left on the cutting room floor: “Former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke has more black voter support than Donald Trump.”  Just think about that for a second. A white guy who was actually a leader of an organization synonymous with not only hating, but terrorizing, black people is more popular with black people than a white guy who used to host a reality show and now may become president.

Trump’s insanely offensive rhetoric against other groups has drawn extensive media coverage and denunciations from people from both sides of the aisle. His allegations of bias against federal judge Gonzalo Curiel were called the textbook definition of racism by Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan, among many, many others. His early calls to ban the entry of Muslims to this country have been so widely denounced it’s hard to find a public figure –even among those who have endorsed him—who has not come out against the remarks. He’s made more derogatory comments about women that I can count.

While he has certainly had moments that can be perceived as offensive to black Americans, such as when he inaccurately tweeted that black people are responsible for 81% of white homicides (which was nowhere near true), when people think of groups Donald Trump has insulted we’re certainly not at the top of that list.

 

And yet, Trump is polling at 24 percent with Hispanic voters, and still has the support of 35% of women voters. With black Americans though, he is at 1 or 2%, depending on the poll. That rock-bottom number has put traditionally red states with notable pockets of black voters in play for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.

While black voters tend to be more party loyal than other groups, Mitt Romney still managed to get 6% of the black vote, and that was in an election year in which black voters turning out to reelect our first black president shattered previous historical turnout records and were given much of the credit for Obama’s glide back to the White House.

So what is it about the Donald?

It’s true that candidate Trump has not singled out black Americans for the same obsessive and insulting focus he has some other groups, but the contempt for him within the black community has been brewing for much longer.

For starters, he made himself the face of the “birther” lie against President Obama. He claims credit for pushing the President to release his birth certificate. (Ironic considering the President’s 2008 opponent, Sen. John McCain, really was born outside of the country, as was 2016 contender Sen. Ted Cruz, both of whom have since become Trump foes.) For many black Americans, the entire birther conspiracy was added to the list of indignities no previous commander-in-chief, all of whom were white, had been subjected to. While most birthers until Trump had primarily been seen as basement kooks who occasionally landed airtime on a few cable shows, he lent the movement a mainstream face that many black Americans have not forgotten or forgiven.

Additionally, while Trump’s language and policy proposals have perhaps not been as openly hostile to black Americans as some other groups, black people are well acquainted with coded dog whistles – and the impact they can have. For instance, Trump’s false tweet about the level of crimes committed by black Americans against whites is precisely the kind of rhetoric that plays into the worst fears of his overwhelmingly white supporters. He’s been doing this for decades, since he put out full-page ads calling for the death penalty for the five black boys of the Central Park Five (something he’s never apologized for, even after it emerged that those boys, who spend decades behind bars, were innocent).

Historically, rhetoric like Trump uses has resulted in terrifying fallout for black people. Many forget that the 1915 film “Birth of a Nation,” is credited with reinvigorating the membership of the Ku Klux Klan, the film’s message essentially that someone needed to take a stand against the rising tide of dangerous brown people. Sound familiar? The era immediately following the film’s release would be one of the most horrifying in terms of violence against black people, men in particular.

So when Trump says of a black protester “maybe he should have been roughed up,” and black protesters at his rallies are punched and otherwise assaulted, his candidacy inevitably calls to mind darker days – particularly for black Americans living in an age in which the shootings of unarmed black men by police are not an uncommon occurrence.

But perhaps the main reason so many black voters are repelled by Donald Trump is that he’s not David Duke. I have a family member who grew up in the segregated South who said she always prefers people who are honest about who they are. They’re simply safer. Ones who present a façade are much more dangerous. While you can see the David Dukes of the world –and all they represent – coming a mile away, there is something particularly dangerous about the kind of bigot that hides behind a suit, tie, a smile and a handful of so-called “black buddies” – who are on the payroll of course. (Here’s looking at youOmarosa.)

Duke’s bigotry may be offensive, but at least it’s honest. Trump’s is just plain offensive.

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Black Chumph “Historian”

Its hard out there for even black, well educated folks to get work. The fall of the white middle class, folks who presumably are the core of Chumph’s ever shrinking “legions”, was bad for white folks…But devastating for the black middle class.

I mean – if there is any group in America who should be angry and start blowing isht up…It ain’t the inbred white cretins who slavishly follow the Chumph.

The Washington, DC area has been a mecca for black folks for generations. The area supports what is probably the largest black middle class in the country.

For some reason the region also seems to attack that sub-fractional subset of morally repugnant, mentally deficient, Lawn ornament, black conservatives. Uncle Wally “confederate” Williams, Crystal “Wrong” Wright, Snidely Whiplash AKA  Peter N. Kirsanow who sits on the scurrilous US Civil Rights Commission, the infamous neurosurgeon who filled the Herman Cain seat for racism denial on the Presidential Primary platform…And this chump – Derek Boyd Hankerson.

Mythical Black Confederates have been a hot topic for slavery denial types and neo-confederate racists for a while.

Mythical…Because there quite simply weren’t any.

Prior to the Civil War, there were three areas of the country with large free black populations. Those would have been Virginia, the area around New Orleans, and North Carolina – where 80% of the free black folks lived.

So…Since Slavers (AKA confederates) weren’t real keen on giving guns to slaves (geez…I wonder why) – If there were to be any Black confederates, they would have had to come from the “free” population. Problem with that is, starting about 1840 all of the slave states started passing laws, called the Black Codes – in an attempt to drive free blacks out. The area I live in currently, on the Eastern Shore of Virginia had one of, if not the largest free black landowning populations in the country in 1840…By 1860, they were all gone. Part of the Black Codes prohibited free black folks from owning guns.

Some of these Laws –

1840 –  “Black Codes” are established in South Carolina. Under these codes, enslaved African-Americans are unable to gather in groups, earn money, grow crops independently, learn to read and own high-quality clothing.

1841 – Residents of Texas are given the responsibility of catching runaway slaves and then, alerting local law enforcement.

1842 – Georgia lawmakers declare that they will not consider freed African-Americans as citizens.

1844 – North Carolina pass a law declaring it will not recognize freed African-Americans as citizens.

Almost every slave state made it illegal for a free black to move into the state, and all of the slave states with ocean ports passed laws requiring the incarceration of any free black sailor who entered the state while serving on a ship. South Carolina set the standard for such laws in 1822 by requiring that ship captains bring their black sailors to the local jail, where they would be held for a fee until the ship was ready to set sail. If the fees were not paid, the black sailor would be auctioned off for temporary service and then expelled from the state. Similar rules applied to emancipated slaves. By 1860 most of the eleven states that formed the Confederacy prohibited the emancipation of slaves within their jurisdiction. Thus, if a master wanted to free his slaves he had to remove them from the state, either before emancipating them or immediately afterwards.

Southern states also prohibited free blacks from engaging in professions that might enable them to foster or aid slave revolts. Thus free blacks could not be pharmacists, gunsmiths, printers or publishers, or operate taverns or places of entertainment. Mississippi made it a crime for blacks to even work for printing offices. Georgia prohibited free blacks from being masons or mechanics, or from contracting to build or repair houses. Most of the slave states prohibited free blacks from learning to read or write. They could also be severely punished for owning antislavery literature. Under a Mississippi law of 1830, whites who circulated “seditious pamphlets,” which would have included antislavery pamphlets, could be jailed, but free blacks were to be executed for the same offense. In 1842, Virginia made it a felony for free blacks to receive abolitionist material in the mail….

The point being – unarmed, prohibited from crossing state borders, locked out of numerous professions, and liable to be re-enslaved at any moment…

Yeah – those free black folks were highly motivated to fight to perpetuate a cause, and a bunch of folks who didn’t even recognize them as citizens.

Now I am a published amateur historian, who focuses on the Virginia North Carolina area. After years of research, uncovering a lot of interesting stuff about life in the Antebellum South, myself, and my far more established and educated compatriots have only ever been able to find one (1) so called Black confederate in the State of Virginia. And we aren’t even terribly sure he was actually…

Black. He shared a surname with a large black family in central Virginia, which led to the assumption by some early researchers (Uncle Wallie Williams) that he was black. However, further research, including DNA shows no relationship, and the family whose surname was besmirched does not, and never has claimed him as kin. Indeed, when the super-racist Walter Plecker conducted a campaign of racial terrorism in the 1930s to positively identify who was actually black, white, or Native American in Virginia – said “black confederate’s” family came up as white.

Ooops!

With that in mind..On to the Chumph’s Lawn Jockey (And Lawn Ornament of the Month) – Know your enemy.

Meet the historian and civil war ‘truther’ responsible for helping Trump win the Florida primary

Derek Boyd Hankerson is an African American university lecturer, filmmaker, author, and political operative. He’s also a Donald Trump supporter. Pledging his support for Trump last year, Hankerson served as Trump’s Northeast Florida Field Director. He helped Trump win “sixty-six of sixty-seven counties in Florida,” he told HNN.

Just who is this African American who backs Donald Trump?  The media have identifiedhim as a historian in their accounts, though he lacks a degree in history.  He received his undergraduate degree in Political Science in 1991 from the University of Maryland College Park. In 2007 he earned his Masters in Business Administration from Webster University in St. Louis, Missouri.

But he has co-authored a history book, Belonging: The Civil War’s South We Never Knew.  The book makes the astonishing claim that blacks in large numbers fought for the South during the Civil War, a myth advanced by white racist groups that long ago was debunked by historians. Hankerson is the descendant of slaves.  His coauthor, Judith Shearer, is the scion of a family that owned slaves.

So who is Derek Boyd Hankerson?

Raised in Prince Georges County, Maryland, Hankerson developed a strong passion for history at the early age of ten years old. When he was young, he frequently took trips to the South with his family, where he visited historical sites and learned history about his West African Gullah Geechee ancestry and the Underground Railroad.

One trip to Saint Augustine forever changed his outlook on history, making him question the accuracy of conventional learning he received from textbooks. He had been taught that St. Augustine was founded in 1513, but a historical sign he saw on his visit listed the city’s founding year as 1565. In the history books he had read neither St. Augustine nor Florida had been mentioned in connection with the founding of European settlements. He was taught the first settlements were in Jamestown and Plymouth.

The Confederate Flag Conspiracy:

Is this Chumph’s boy?

He began to wonder – “What else are people hiding?”

In his twenties he was a political operative in the Reagan administration. His political resume includes working in the White House under both President George Herbert Walker Bush and George W. Bush.  In one stint he served in the White House Office of Public Liaison for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).  He also worked on campaigns for governors and senators.

Which brings us back to Donald Trump.  For all the officials he’s worked for, Hankerson says no one has had quite the same appeal for him as Trump. What drew him to Trump is the candidate’s background as a businessman and his stance as an outsider. A Washington insider himself, Hankerson said he is tired of self-seeking politicians. Ideologically, he strongly identifies with Trump’s opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), Common Core and the outsourcing of jobs.

Hankerson is currently in Wisconsin working on the campaign of a businessman who’schallenging House Speaker Paul Ryan in the GOP primary. In the political off-season Hankerson devotes himself to teaching, filmmaking, and writing.

His book, Belonging: The Civil War’s South We Never Knew, is on sale on Amazon, but has received no reviews.  There are also no blurbs.  In an interview with HNN over email he insisted that blacks fought for the South:

“I’ve personally had 30 members of my family who are native to the south and fought to protect their homes and farms. I also have family members who fought for the north to include the family’s 54th Mass. These relatives in the south were part of Calvary units, sharp shooters, officers (mulatto), infantry and reserves. It’s a misnomer or incorrect history in believing blacks didn’t fight for the south when the majority or 80 percent of black people are originally from the south and most arrived pre-1800 or pre-mass immigration. To classify them as coward is false.”

Those who believe blacks fought in the Confederacy (at least voluntarily) are in a small minority. Eric Foner, DeWitt Clinton Professor of History at Columbia University and an expert in African American history, dismisses claims like Hankerson’s, which rest on the belief that slavery wasn’t the cause of the Civil War:

This is a picture of the 1st Louisiana Guard.They were actually founded as a confederate militia by free blacks to protect the City of New Orleans…Until the confederate General refused to recognize them as legitimate troops. They promptly changed sides and became the the foundation of the 1st US Colored Troops fighting for the Union in the West.

“Slavery, as Southern Vice President Alexander Stephens put it, was ‘the cornerstone’ of the Confederacy. This does not mean that it was the only issue contributing to the coming of the Civil War. Nor does it suggest that the hundreds of thousands of men who fought under the Confederate banner, most of them non-slaveholders, were motivated exclusively by the desire to keep blacks in bondage. Yet to claim that Confederate soldiers went to war to protect their ‘way of life’ conveniently forgets that this way of life was founded on slavery.”

“Slaves fully understood this,” says Foner. “A few light-skinned blacks may have passed for white and joined the Southern Army. But the regiments of black Confederate troops one hears about of late exist only in myth or in the willful confusion of the Army’s black servants and laborers–slaves impressed into service by their masters–with combat soldiers. The reality is that hundreds of thousands of slaves eagerly sought their freedom by fleeing to Union lines and enlisting in the Union Army.”

Scholars have conceded that up to 50,000 slaves labored for the Confederacy and that some blacks actually fought for the Confederacy.  Harvard’s John Stauffer says the number of black soldiers was somewhere between 3,000 and 10,000. But he points out that that would have been less than 1 percent of the black men living in the South of military age.  Even this modest admission, he says, has gotten him into hot water with other scholars….Read the rest here

Black Conservative Jock Strap Award

Lawn Jockey black Republican of the Month Award – Derek Boyd Hankerson

 

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Speaking Falsehood to Race, and Touting It as “Telling it Like it Is”

Lot of racism passing for “truth” out there on the right…

When ‘telling it like it is’ exposes ‘lazy’ thinking about blacks

I’ve really struggled with how to write about the results of two polls on race released this week. So, let me just toss out the two findings that have induced this paralysis.

According to the Reuters-Ipsos poll, “Supporters of U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump are more likely to describe African Americans as ‘criminal,’ ‘unintelligent,’ ‘lazy’ and ‘violent’ than voters who backed some Republican rivals in the primaries or who support Democratic contender Hillary Clinton.”

According to the Pew Research Center’s survey on race, “About six-in-ten (59%) white Republicans say too much attention is paid to race and racial issues these days, while only 21% of Democrats agree.”

That folks harbor anti-black views is nothing new. An Associated Press pollfrom 2012 showed that negative views of African Americans jumped from 48 percent in 2008 to 51 percent in 2012. And that number jumped to 56 percent when implicit racial attitudes were factored in. But the Reuters-Ipsos poll still shocks the conscience.

 

Trump’s supporters are overwhelmingly white. Many of them proudly say he won them over by “telling it like it is” and “not being politically correct” with his racist, xenophobic and nativist presidential campaign. So, I’m hardly surprised that the followers of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee lead the pack in thinking that African Americans are “less ‘intelligent’ than whites” (32 percent), “more ‘lazy’ than whites” (40 percent), “more ‘violent’ than whites (nearly 50 percent) and “more ‘criminal’ than whites (nearly 50 percent).

That’s why I cocked an eyebrow when I read some of the results of the Pew poll. That 59 percent of Republicans think too much attention is paid to race or racial issues is as absurd as it is willful blindness to their contribution to the nation’s race problem. And the consequences of the attitudes expressed in the Reuters-Ipsos poll are revealed in the Pew poll.

The graphic says it all: “About half of blacks say they’ve been treated like they were suspicious or not smart.” Forty-seven (47) percent of African Americans said in the last 12 months “people acted as if they were suspicious of [them].” Two percentage points fewer (45 percent) said “people acted as if they thought [the respondent] weren’t smart.”

Now, I don’t need no stinkin’ polls to tell me what I know from my personal experience. Still, it stings when you see how little folks think of you and your people and how that manifests itself in harmful ways.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on July 1, 2016 in The New Jim Crow

 

Tags: , , , ,

Ted Cruz Leads Racist Attack in Congress Against Ellison and Carson

Islamophobic and racist in charge Republican Ted Cruz entertained a bigot to speak before Congress, and attack the only two Muslim members. I think Cruz should be investigated for his ties to domestic terrorism.

Reps. Keith Ellison and Andre Carson, the two Muslim members of Congress, were accused by a witness at a Senate hearing of having ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Witness At Ted Cruz Hearing Accuses Congress’ Two Muslim Members Of Muslim Brotherhood Ties

In explosive testimony Tuesday, a witness before a Senate panel about Islamic terrorism accused the two Muslim members of Congress of having attended an event organized by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The charge was leveled by Chris Gaubatz, a “national security consultant” who has moonlighted as an undercover agitator of Muslim groups that he accuses of being terrorist outfits, and it was directed at Reps. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and André Carson (D-Ind.). At the heart of his accusation is the attendance by those two members at a 2008 convention hosted by the Islamic Society of North America — a Muslim umbrella group, which Gaubatz claims is a front for the Muslim Brotherhood.

“I attended a convention in Columbus, Ohio, in 2008, organized by Muslim Brotherhood group, ISNA, and both the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons had recruitment and outreach booths,” Gaubatz said in his testimony. “Both Congressman Keith Ellison, MN, and Andre Carson, IN, spoke at the Muslim Brotherhood event.”

Allegations that Ellison and Carson are secret Muslim agents with extremist leanings are usually found among fringe groups online, often discussed in dire tones on poorly designed websites. Rarely, if ever, do such sentiments get read into congressional testimony, with the imprimatur that offers.

Responsibility for this rare instance lies with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who oversaw the hearing as chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts and whose staff likely saw the testimonies of the witnesses.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) later addressed Tuesday’s hearing and defended Ellison.

“He is my congressman. He is a man of great patriotism,” she said, adding that he has advocated for additional funding for efforts to detect what attracts young people to join terrorist groups.

An aide to Ellison confirmed that he did attend the 2008 ISNA convention. He’s gone to a few of the group’s conventions, in fact. Carson’s office didn’t return a request for comment. But news reports show that both he and Carson led a discussion at the 2008 convention on how to mobilize Muslims politically. President Barack Obama has addressed the group as well, though only via a video recording.

Critics of ISNA have insisted that these politicians have either turned a blind eye to — or explicitly embraced — the group’s affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood, an affiliation that is based on ties some of the founding ISNA members have allegedly had to the hard-line religious organization. ISNA has long insisted that no such connection has ever existed.

“I can definitely tell you we are not Muslim Brotherhood. We are not affiliated with them at all and never were,” said Faryal Khatri, an official with ISNA. “That much I can reassure you.”

ISNA is not the only group targeted by Gaubatz. In 2009, he told Talking Points Memo that he obtained an internship with the Council on American-Islamic Relations as part of an effort to secretly collect evidence against the group to be used in a book written by his father. The book, “Muslim Mafia,” alleged that CAIR, a Muslim advocacy group that works to combat Islamophobia, was a front for the Muslim Brotherhood.

Cruz’s office did not respond to a request for comment on Gaubatz’s allegations against Ellison and Carson or whether it had given either member a chance to respond. But the senator has displayed a tolerance for these kinds of conspiracy theories in the past.

Before he suspended his presidential campaign, Cruz appointed known Islamophobe Frank Gaffney to his team of national security advisers. Gaffney, now head of the Center for Security Policy, has objected to Ellison and Carson serving on the House Intelligence Committee because he believes their Muslim faith could compel them to leak information to the Muslim Brotherhood. He has also accused Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin, and conservative heavyweights Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan of being closeted Muslim Brotherhood members.

When asked about his controversial selection, Cruz defended Gaffney as a “serious thinker” focused on “fighting jihadism across the globe.”

 
2 Comments

Posted by on June 28, 2016 in The Definition of Racism, The New Jim Crow

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 228 other followers

%d bloggers like this: