Tuesday, January 11, 2005

Pity the Fool

By Jordy Cummings

Read full article...

Posted 01/11 | Add a Comment

    Comments:

    You must register to comment.

    Login | Register

  1. This is a minor note but my understanding is that, whatever may have gone on in Chicago, JFK would have won the 1960 election in the electoral college (the only place it has ever been won.) Daley’s actions probably “gave” JFK the popular vote.

    Posted by micah holmquist from  on  01/12  at  04:10 PM

  2. I have heard that story - i was referring more to JFK and pals’ mastery of manipulation and media games (helped by Dulles leaking reports to JFK of the anti-castro actions being planned by the CIA that Nixon refused to mention for fear of violating “national security") - the election of JFK - not his assassination, as some contend - was in my opinion the beginning of the spectacle’s takeover of American politics.

    Posted by j cummings from Canada  on  01/13  at  11:59 AM

  3. Check out the story on The Black Commentator.  They’ve been reporting on Williams and other African American “political whores” that have gained questionable “status” and dollars selling out the black community.

    The reason is that blacks are more Liberal across the issues than any other group and is a cynical attempt to lure blacks to behave in the insane manner of as whites who vote their fears and against their class interest.

    (As an aside, Liberalism in the Black community was a deliberate attempt to “conservatize” blacks who are fact during the 30’s and up through the Black Power movement of the ‘70 displayed tons more radicalism than whites thus a major threat to the status quo.  I’d also like to take the time to acknowledging the passing of James Forman).

    WB

    Posted by Wilson Barber from  on  01/13  at  02:58 PM

  4. Interesting parenthetical aside WB. I did not know about Forman. Respect. I’ve just put down Martin Smith’s short book ‘John Coltrane: Jazz, Racism and Resistance’ so I’m feeling both your comment and Jordy’s article.

    Posted by Theo from Greece  on  01/13  at  04:00 PM

  5. I’d like Wilson Barber to elaborate on his point about Black liberalism?  Do you see specific figures involved, an actual attempt to de-radicalize the Black community?  I’m just not sure - though I don’t doubt you’re right- what you’re talking about...are you talking about…

    Posted by j cummings from Canada  on  01/13  at  09:59 PM

  6. I don’t have any direct sources outside of stories that I heard as a child from family members about struggles of black folks from the even the 20’s from the Garvey movements, to the trade movemnts and especally in major cities their embrace of Socialism and Communism.  What attracted many was Socailist/Communist stance on racism.  The Commumist Party was huge in attracting blacks becuase of their union organizing as well as taking an active role against lynching.  Lynching was THE major black civil right issue of the 30’s and 40’s.

    However after WWII blacks returned from the war with greater militancy, fellings of entitlement, and the knowledge to fight—they also made DEMANDS.  They did not want a repeat of their post-WWI experience.  There were many direct actions (riots) that occurred thus this post-war militancy had to be abated—enter Liberalism as well as the black church.

    Liberalism and the church conspired to quell working class militancy.  The church getting what it wanted—“leadership and influence” and the Liberals getting what they wanted—the abatement of working class militancy.  This is the reason for the rise of King, Jackie Robertson and the and the alienation of Paul Robeson.  (Recall Robertson’s testimony before HUAC to understand how Robertson was use to sell the American Dream).

    This militancy although quelled in the 50’s rose again with the rise of the Black Power movement of the late 60’s only to be defeated not only by COINTELPRO but by the Philedelphia Plan.

    If you want to know why America is so fu**ek up study BLACK history.  RACISM is the primary reason whites have so long voted against their own working class interest.  Mr Cummings you alluded to that in your piece and you hit the nail on the head.

    But I do take issue with one aspect of your piece…

    Why the f**k should we care about Joe Wilson’s wife who god know if she was involved in the drugs distribution in black neighborhoods formally exposed by Gary Webb.  She works for the CIA for godsakes!  Do you think she would be exempt from Nuremberg?  I don’t.  I think this was one of those ABB issues reflecting the utter weakness of the American left.

    WB

    Posted by Wilson Barber from  on  01/14  at  12:17 AM

  7. Apparently, she was actually working undercover collecting info about weapons proliferation in a situation that could have gotten her killed.  Regardless of the criminality of the organization for which she worked, what Bush did to her was disgusting.  Not all people who work for foreign service are automatically complicit in all aspects of US foreign policy.  For the left to have that attitude would be to betray a very important interest we should have in influencing these people.

    Posted by j cummings from Canada  on  01/14  at  12:24 AM

  8. I appreciate your comments and sentiments regarding the whole Wilson’s wife affair.  It clearly was bullying from the Administration.  But coming from a “people’s” position this story seem rather minor and overblown considering that we are still talking about the “agency” that has a long history of harming whole peoples and nations.

    In the “overall” the Wilson story appears much more to be a tactical ABB manoeuvre rather than substantive.  In other words the folks in the “hood” could care less.

    Much more air time, ink, and focus could have been placed on the conditions of the affects of CIA polices here and abroad.  I mean the law was really directed at Phillip Agee.

    I know this isn’t zero sum and I’m not saying that there was no injustice but when you consider the damage wrought by the Agency upon thousands if not millions of lives I just cannot squeeze much sympathy out for Wilson’s wife of whom Wilson (the husband) started to make appearances on Democracy Now! the lecture circuit, the attention of David Corn and the liberals at the Nation.

    Now let see, brother’s in the hood in jail, 50% black unemployment in NYC, welfare repealed, infant mortality through the roof, homelessness, no health care and Wilson’s wife…

    I don’t know man, seem pretty obvious to me.

    WB

    Posted by Wilson Barber from  on  01/14  at  02:23 AM

  9. I just thought of one source that may help you.  See the book “Head Negro In Charge” by Norman Kelley.  This is an excellent book and was recently reviewed on CounterPunch by I think Louis Proyect of MarxMail.  It can provide you with some insight along the lines of my aforementioned commentary.

    WB

    Posted by Wilson Barber from  on  01/14  at  02:36 AM

  10. On question a) I think things work laterally - ie when Wilson is shown with Goodman, left, etc, that affects his old school CIA friends, including Michael Schneur, who cites Robert Fisk more than any other single sourcein his book.  Do you want the CIA to be a bastion of resistance to Bush, because it is.  Ironic, yes.  But resistance in official circles is a good thing.  It is not all “ABB” and that is a crude simplification.

    I’ve heard of the HNIC book, I may check it out.  I think the best example of what I asked you is the story mostly of whichever Black groups would be Pro Israel, for that’s where they’d get their funding.  This is what happened to a lot of talented Black organizers, had to go Zionist if they were to remain in the fray, lest they get blackmailed for former CP ties (Robeson style) or homoseuality (Bayard Rustin was head of “Blacks for Israel” and Pro-Vietnam war, when only a few years earler he had been a pacifist.)

    Posted by j cummings from Canada  on  01/14  at  01:37 PM

  11. J,

    You make some good points about how the Bush Administration has made “enemies” within the enemy establishment.  Yet Bush is still in power.  I guess this is a “positive” development but I wouldn’t count on it from a leftist viewpoint.  That’s really the basis of my critique.  These are still the same folks who represent an institution that has been used to overthrow mildly redistributionist governments.

    On your second point.  This is a great topic that needs further discussion.  Zionism has had a deliterious effect on Black leadership and one of the reason why Farrakhan a popular in the black community albeit articulated quite crudely.

    I like to explore this when I have more time.

    Thanks,
    WB

    Posted by wilson barber from  on  01/14  at  03:36 PM

  12. That should read..

    why Farrakhan is popular in the black community albeit his rhetoric is crudely reactionary.

    Thanks
    WB

    Posted by wilson barber from  on  01/14  at  03:41 PM

  13. I think its more complicated than that (i.e. a direct causal factor between Farakhan and NOI, who should have been discredited by their role in killing Malcolm X - and the Black community.) In truth, many Black leftist and revolutionary groups - the Panthers, etc. were Pro-Palestinian but not at all Judeophobic.  The Judeophobia came in during the Cointelpro era, of which empowered Farakhan.  Farakhan and the current NOI became powerful/known again in the late 70s/early 80s, but I have spoken to people who claim he was used by more powerful forces to intentionally “sink” Jesse Jackson’s campaign in 84.  His reactionary attitude is not crude.  It is well rehearsed.

    Posted by j cummings from Canada  on  01/15  at  12:02 PM

  14. Exactly J.  I could not have said it any better.  And receives very little if no discussion at all in black journals.  The Panthers and many in the Black Power movement extended and align their message of Black Liberation in international solidarity with much of the people of color in the world who was resisting U.S. imperialism. 
    Including that of the Palestians.  This predicament obviously exposed the contradication of the so-called “Black/Jewish” alliance.  I found it somewhat amusing several years ago when Cornel West thought that he and the liberal zionist Michael Lerner could so how nostaligically rekindle that “alliance”.

    It is clear however the COINTELPRO targeted black leftist and not reactionary orgainzation like the NOI and as you so aptly articalated.  I’m would not be surprise if the NOI has worked with the government but the government has a way of getting rival faction to do their dirty work.

    The Jackson candidacy however had other forces as well working against including racism, the Democratic Party establishment and Jackson’s own’s weaknesses.  The is an excellent account of Jackson candidacy in CounterPunch’s latest book “A Dime’s Worth Of Difference”.

    Nevertheless, you have touch on what I think is a “taboo” topic for the left and especially among African American scholars and writers.

    I really appreciate the fact that you broght this up.

    WB.

    Posted by Wilson Barber from  on  01/15  at  06:49 PM

  15. Lerner is a far cry from Dershowitz, who Henry Louis Gates works with.  In fact, West’s book with Lerner is quite useful.  My view on Lerner is despite his Zionism, he objectively is good for the left, as he and his publication by stating “OK we’re Zionists” (meaning that we believe in two, not one states, as opposed to all the problems) - allows readers to really look at Jewish cultural issues and problems.  Tikkun used to regularly say nice thinks about Edward Said, where I was introduced to his work.  It also regularly features actual radicals like Buhle and Tanya Reinhart.  Again, Lerner is not so much a Zionist as someone who wants Jews to feel comfortable on the left, thus affectng his persona.  I believe his heart is in the right place, and what ANSWER did to him was stupid.

    Posted by j cummings from Canada  on  01/16  at  03:42 PM

  16. Further, I think - go to any city with a large Jewish and Black population - there is a Black/Jewish alliance in left/union/civil society/academia, etc. 

    But other Jews, who represent a small fraction of the community purport to break apart that alliance, in the service of Zionism and conservatism (many Zionist and right wing/neocon profs started the anti-affirmative action movement in the 70s cause, in the words of Glazer"there were Jewish jobs goingto Black folks.")....(Remember to use language correctly and understand that only 20 percent of Jews identify as Zionists)

    But in terms of the left, Jews have always, and I dare say, will always, be disproportionate, since the left is in many ways a (secular European, cosmpopolitan) Jewish tradition, predating Zionism.  I think to go all the way to critiqueing the actually-existing “Black-Jewish alliance” (which doesn’t call itself that anymore really)..is different from critiqueing Zionists, many of whom were convincedby their Christianity, not their “love of Israel.”

    And by the way, he quote that Zionists often use about Martin Luther King being a Zionist ,is a fraud (see a piece at Znet by Tim Wise.)

    Posted by j cummings from Canada  on  01/16  at  03:50 PM

  17. As a conservative and a kick ass deceased bass player, I am highly troubled by this Armstrong Williams payola imbroglio.

    Looks like the scandals are starting to hit GWB in his 2nd term as has so often happened to 2 term Presidents.

    a little Birdland anyone?

    Posted by Jaco Pastorius from In the Ethers  on  01/22  at  07:13 PM

  18. Jordy sez…

    But other Jews, who represent a small fraction of the community purport to break apart that alliance, in the service of Zionism and conservatism (many Zionist and right wing/neocon profs started the anti-affirmative action movement in the 70s cause, in the words of Glazer"there were Jewish jobs goingto Black folks.")....(Remember to use language correctly and understand that only 20 percent of Jews identify as Zionists)

    Sometimes its not the just the numbers but the influence.  However your aforemention remarks and time frame supports my contention that the so-called “Black/Jewish” alliance would befall this rhetorical clash because African American during the late 60’s/early 70’s had become more radical and militant especially after the assination of MLK who himself was moving from a liberal-moderate into something more radical.

    With the current state of politics Mr. Lerner IMO does not offer any solutions.  Clearly the so-called “two state” solution will not bring justice to the Palestians and Mr. Lerner like many Liberal tend to cowardly advocate unjust moderation but never full justice.  Thus once again I believe that the Lerner/West road show was obviously destined to failure because it failed to address these contradictions.

    Regarding ANSWER refusal to allow Mr. Lerner time to address folks.  I believe it was ANSWER policy to refuse such people who have harshly critized them.  I guess it would be like advocating for David Corn to speak.  I don’t have a position but I can certainly understand with such limited time why present someone who would be advocating the typical, limiting and unjust mainstram position.  There are several Jewish organization here in the U.S that are anti-Zionist and advocate for a secular Israel and the Palestianins right to return and ANSWER has given such groups a forum.  With C-SPAN coverage of ANSWER rallies I’ve had the opportunity to find out about these groups.  Thus I would not be that critical of ANSWER.

    With the current false “debate” of the non-existent Social Security “crisis” (rhetoric started by the Clinton Administration) and it being referred to as the 3rd rail.  I think if there is any issue today that is the “3rd rail” this discussion is it.  Thus once again thanks for raising it.

    WB

    Posted by Wilson Barber from  on  01/26  at  02:35 PM
    19. Commenting is not available in this weblog entry. {/if}

    Next entry: Democrats Support Bush’s Iran Policy

    Previous entry: Exposing the Lies of Our Times: An Interview with Mickey Z.

    [ads]

    Support Press Action