What if the NY Post Cartoonist wasn't Racist?

People have asked me what I would say if it turns out that the New York Post cartoonist had no ill intent and didn't intend to invoke any racism in his recent cartoon that appears to depict President Obama as a monkey. Here is what I would say:

1) The idea that he may have been referring to all of Congress as monkeys doesn't add up, because the police didn't shoot a PACK of monkeys, they only shot one. That leads us to think that this person is the "lead monkey", which would be President Obama.

2) Obama is the one most readily associated with the Stimulus Package, since he was the one who promised it, the one who signed it, and the one who celebrated passing it. Did they think we would believe the monkey to be Nancy Pelosi?

3) It is actually racial inequality that gives the artist the privilege of going through life without sufficient cultural competency to even realize that this cartoon might be offensive to Black people, who've been compared to monkeys for the past several hundred years. Additionally, it is also racial inequality that gives this cartoonist the social privilege to say "screw you" to the Black community when they express reasonable outrage over this insult. The New York Post has not apologized and they've only worked to discredit Rev. Sharpton. That's the "Archie Bunker - I ain't changin nothin" approach to racism.

Bottom line: Even if you don't intend to be offensive, any idiot in the newsroom should have been able to look at this cartoon to say "You know, someone might think that we are depicting an assassination of our president and comparing him to a monkey. Maybe we should clarify a bit." Had there been more Black faces in that newsroom (again, a product of historical racial inequality), someone would have caught this horrible mistake. If I draw something that is highly offensive to Jews, even if I made an honest mistake, I should be respectful enough to acknowledge my mistake and apologize. Part of racial healing is similar to a marriage: you respect your partner's feelings even if you don't understand them.

When it comes to intelligence, compassion, professionalism and cultural understanding, the New York Post gets a failing grade. This cartoon is a disgrace.

New York Post Thinks Obama's a Monkey?

I hate sending out another message so soon, but I felt compelled to respond. The New York Post has apparently decided that our new president reminds them of an ape. Perhaps I am wrong, but my investigation has led me to believe that there is no other explanation for this unbelievable portrayal. Perhaps it was a misguided reference to the fact that the cartoonist has a problem with the nature of the last stimulus package. But it is certainly a lack of cultural competency which leads this organization to think that it might be ok to portray an African American as a monkey. This goes back to the fact that as long as "mainstream" media maintains its commitment to segregation among hosts, editors, and producers, we are always going to have this problem.


This cartoon is very serious, for many reasons. Here are some undeniable facts:

1) The New York Post had better start explaining things fast. You've seriously undermined your journalistic integrity with a cartoon that is not funny, insightful or meaningful in any apparent way and also appears to be horrifically offensive.

2) This cartoon appears to be making a joke about killing the President, which is both unpatriotic and a serious threat to the Obama family and our nation. I can't recall ever seeing the New York Post or any relevant publication having the audacity to make jokes about shooting The President of the United States.

3) Referring to our first Black president as a monkey reminds us that the rise of Barack Obama may bring out the most beautiful parts of America and the ugliest. To have executives at such a powerful news organization sign off on this kind of juvenile, vile, and frightening work tells us that our country still needs a racial overhaul.

4) If the New York Post is unable to come forth with a reasonable explanation for this cartoon (I am not sure what shooting a chimp has to do with the Stimulus Package), all fair-minded Americans should not only write and complain to the Newspaper, but they should boycott and voice their concerns with any corporation choosing to supply this newspaper with advertising revenue.

I'm having my staff dig up contact information on the New York Post, as well as phone numbers and addresses. We are also going to find out who the major corporate sponsors are. I will post them on my blog as soon as I get the information.


Sincerely,
Dr Boyce
www.BoyceWatkins.com

Charles Barkley’s Vision, Auburn’s Racism, the Great NCAA Plantation

By Dr. Boyce Watkins

I don’t like Charles Barkley very much, I have to be honest about that. On an appearance on ESPN, I was asked by Charles’ buddy, Stephen A. Smith, what I think about Barkley possibly running for Governor of Alabama. My comment was that “Charles Barkley is a man who always says what’s on his mind. But the problem is that there is never anything in his brain to begin with.”

So, if I don’t like you and I give you a compliment, then that really means I like what you just did.

Charles Barkley, the man I can’t bear to listen to on TNT, recently called out his alma mater, Auburn University for their decision to hire the woefully unqualified Gene Chizik over Turner Gill, a coach who actually deserved the job. Gene Chizik has amassed the stellar record of 5-19 over the past two seasons at Iowa State University. The “geniuses” at Auburn University also paid their last coach, Tommy Tubberville, $5.1 million dollars to hit the road after going 85-10 during the last 10 seasons. This is the same brilliant thinking which leads us to believe that sub-mediocre human beings like George Bush and Sarah Palin are qualified to run the free world. Now I remember why I left the south.

One would think that Turner Gill of The University of Buffalo might have been a good pick. He took Buffalo to their first bowl game in school history, and soundly defeated unbeaten Ball State, who was ranked #12 in the country. The problem was that Gill posed the great deal breaker of nearly every head football coaching contract in NCAA sports: He was Black.

Sure, if he were trying to be a wide receiver, he’d be a lock. If he were trying to be a janitor or cafeteria worker, I am sure that Auburn University would have recruited him heavily. But Gill doesn’t realize that for schools like Auburn (and Kentucky, Tennessee and many other schools in the NCAA, particularly the SEC), Black men are only supposed to sacrifice their bodies on the field for virtually no wages, with little hope of actually earning the millions of dollars the NCAA pays its head coaches. Over 50% of all college football players are black, yet less than 4% of their coaches are Black. The athletes earn over $2 Billion per year for the NCAA, yet many of their families live in poverty. In other words, the NCAA has become the ultimate plantation, lawn jockeys and all.

Terry Bowden, Richard Lapchick and the rest of the country are calling it for what it is: Good old fashioned racism. They are stating, as I’ve said all along, that there is a time when African Americans must demand fairness in college sports, for the NCAA has shown almost no commitment to fairness when it comes to matters of race. Like our broken financial system, the system of college sport has created a network of irresponsible, illogical and unintelligent cronyism leading to embarrassing and inefficient outcomes. Paying $5.1 Million dollars to get rid of a good coach so you can pay more money to get a bad one is flat out stupid. Even if you are a racist, you should at least be a smart one.

I applaud Charles Barkley for pointing out the obvious, that Auburn University and the NCAA need a wake-up call. This isn’t 1955 anymore.

Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University and a faculty affiliate at the College Sport Research Institute at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He does regular work in national media, including CNN, CBS Sports, BET and ESPN. For more information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com.

DL Hughley Breaks the News: Black People Respond

Dr. Boyce Watkins
http://www.boycewatkins.com/

Hey peeps!

The response I received from you guys on the new CNN show, “DL Hughley Breaks the News” was overwhelming. Within 20 minutes of sending out the email statement, we had an entire inbox full of messages expressing extreme disappointment in CNN and this offensive new show. This helped me realize that we need to do something about it.

Our goal is to present an intelligent, dignified and firm response to CNN, letting them know that programming based on racial stereotypes is not acceptable. Political satire can be quite funny, but it must be intelligent, balanced and conscientious. This is not the brand of humor presented in “DL Hughley Breaks the News”, which went back to the same degrading media stereotypes and disturbing images that scholars and consumers have been upset about for decades. Senator Obama opened the door for us to see ourselves as educated, enlightened and empowered, so the last thing we need is to be readmitted to the asylum of pimps, thugs, criminals and buffoons.
A sample letter you can use to contact CNN is presented below. You can get the contact information at this link. You can also forward this link and email to anyone you believe to share your sentiments regarding how our community should respond to this painful and disappointing new show.

Finally, don’t forget that we are going to “Get our paper straight in 2008”, so if you wish to join our group for Dr. Boyce Financial Advice, please click here.

The sample letter is below. You can get contact information for key decision-makers at CNN by clicking here. Remember: Change won’t start with Obama or McCain. Meaningful change is going to start with US.

To CNN and its key decision-makers,

As a member of the Your Black World coalition, I am writing to inform you that I found your recently released show, “DL Hughley Breaks the News” to be a tremendous disappointment. While I certainly respect CNN’s effort to develop itself as “The most trusted name in news”, I did not find the new DL Hughley show to be consistent with the degree of trust that CNN has worked to obtain with the American public.

The 2008 Presidential campaign represents an amazing landmark for change within our country by allowing an African American male to present himself to the world as a dignified and educated member of our society, an image which lies in stark contrast to media representations confining Black men to being criminals, rappers, athletes and entertainers. I found it disheartening that this progress was reversed by CNN’s decision to create a show which relied on the very same stereotypes to build a consistent stream of laughs at the expense of African Americans everywhere. The show was also degrading to those in the broader community who support the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama, and who wish to see our great country move past the deep and painful wounds created by our nation’s legacy of racial inequality.

We ask that you discontinue the show, “DL Hughley Breaks the News”, and consider a brand of political humor that is respectful to all ethnicities and shows greater appreciation for the tremendous gains made in the 2008 Presidential election. Perhaps then, CNN can regain its status as “The most trusted name in news”.
Sincerely,

The Your Black World Coalition

Silly Terminology and “Divisive Hate Speech”

By Dr. Boyce Watkins

www.BoyceWatkins.com

As I work to do my part toward the fair treatment of African Americans, I can't recall how many emails I've received from well-intended, yet uninformed individuals who presume that my words are nothing more than "divisive hate speech". It doesn't matter what I say, or how I say it. As long as I bring up the impact that slavery and oppression has on the present, I am accused of using "divisive hate speech". When I bring up the fact that slavery, oppression and economic exclusion have created the massive wealth gap between blacks and whites in America, I am accused of using "divisive hate speech". When I mention the disproportionate black male prison population (an artifact of Jim Crow and slavery) or the lack of tenured faculty at majority universities, I am again accused of using "divisive hate speech".

I now ignore that line in any email I receive. To use that term in response to being confronted with slavery is like an irresponsible father getting angry every time his child's mother reminds him to pay child support. Reconciliation for extraordinary damage and devastation comes with a price. You can't just wish it away.

I know how to look past the critics, they don't bother me. But for some reason, that term (divisive hate speech) was in my brain when I woke up this morning, and I wanted to share some thoughts with those who are bothered by such criticism. Part of the price of admission for African Americans into so-called "mainstream America" is that we must do our ancestors a huge disservice by remaining quiet about the atrocities they've experienced. If you spend just one day thoroughly studying the impact of slavery and the experience of some of the slaves, you wouldn't think for one second that it is ok to forget what they went through.

The reason the term "divisive hate speech" is silly in response to any African American who speaks up on racism is because it is reflective of the lack of personal responsibility that our country teaches when it comes to dealing with the impact of slavery and discrimination. If I am wealthy because my father raped my best friend's mother and stole her belongings, it would be irresponsible for me to say "that's divisive hate speech!" whenever my friend attempts to have my family held accountable for the actions of my father. If I am forcing my friend to remain silent about what happened to his mother as a condition for our friendship, then the truth is that he is not my friend at all. The secondary truth is that I do not respect my friend nor love him enough to make things right after what my family has done.

African Americans are in the same situation. My precondition for being accepted by my colleagues in the academy is for me to remain silent about the raping, castration, murder, robbery and torture of my own historical family members during slavery. Engage in this mental exercise with me (close your eyes and really imagine this), picture having your siblings taken away forever at the age of 6, seeing your mother raped in front of you or watching your father beaten and eventually killed. That gives you a tiny glimpse into the lives of African Americans during slavery and Jim Crow.

The secondary reality that comes from treating another group of people like this for 400 years (that's nearly half a millennium, a very long time to form cultural habits) is that the dominant group is going to gain a sense of comfort and habit in their perpetual attempts to oppress the minority group. The minority group is going to feel comfortable being oppressed and victimized. I refuse to be a victim, so I am fighting back. Fighting back and refusing to be victimized is what leads to rejection by the group that is comfortable oppressing minorities. It also leads to conflicts with other minorities who have grown comfortable remaining silent about the truth (i.e. the “Administrative Negro” – Modern day overseers). That partially explains the term "divisive hate speech" or the use of inaccurate terms like “militant” to describe individuals like myself, who’ve never picked up arms against another human being. In fact, I recall hearing an esteemed black colleague of mine politely tell his superior that "racism doesn't exist in this organization", when privately, he knows that his company has not promoted a black man in 100 years. That is the kind of sick, twisted lie that many African Americans are forced to live, all in the name of "not appearing divisive".

Another reason it is irresponsible to use a term like "divisive hate speech" to describe any man or woman's desire to discuss the impact of slavery is that the truth MUST BE CONFRONTED IF YOU ARE TO MOVE FORWARD. A fat man who is challenged to exercise might want to say "Exercise is painful and unfair!" But he should understand that without exercise, he is going to remain fat. America is that fat man. Every time the term "divisive hate speech" is used as an attempt to silence those who speak out on race, Americans are behaving like the fat man who doesn't have the discipline to exercise. He should realize that confronting his weight problem is the only way he is going to get healthy. There is no way around it.

For the overweight man in my example above to think that he can achieve the gain without enduring a period of discomfort and sacrifice would be both weak and irresponsible. That is what many Americans want. They want racial harmony without the responsibility of true reconciliation and accountability. That is something I refuse to accept. So, from this point on, the term "divisive hate speech" is officially deemed silly and counterproductive. If you want to criticize me, you have to come at me with something better than that. But then again, I don’t pay much attention to the haters. Malcolm, Martin and Muhammad Ali taught us that the world will never reward an intelligent Black man for speaking his mind. I encourage all of you to reinforce your commitment to truth.

My Friend Tim Wise: The Essence of White Privilege

This was written by my friend and respected colleague, Tim Wise. Tim, along with Father Michael Pfleger, both happen to be white males who actually get it. They both have my eternal respect.

This is Your Nation on White Privilege
By Tim Wise
9/13/08

For those who still can’t grasp the concept of white privilege, or who are constantly looking for some easy-to-understand examples of it, perhaps this list will help.

White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because “every family has challenges,” even as black and Latino families with similar “challenges” are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.

White privilege is when you can call yourself a “fuckin’ redneck,” like Bristol Palin’s boyfriend does, and talk about how if anyone messes with you, you'll “kick their fuckin' ass,” and talk about how you like to “shoot shit” for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy (and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug.

White privilege is when you can attend four different colleges in six years like Sarah Palin did (one of which you basically failed out of, then returned to after making up some coursework at a community college), and no one questions your intelligence or commitment to achievement, whereas a person of color who did this would be viewed as unfit for college, and probably someone who only got in in the first place because of affirmative action.

White privilege is when you can claim that being mayor of a town smaller than most medium-sized colleges, and then Governor of a state with about the same number of people as the lower fifth of the island of Manhattan, makes you ready to potentially be president, and people don’t all piss on themselves with laughter, while being a black U.S. Senator, two-term state Senator, and constitutional law scholar, means you’re “untested.”

White privilege is being able to say that you support the words “under God” in the pledge of allegiance because “if it was good enough for the founding fathers, it’s good enough for me,” and not be immediately disqualified from holding office--since, after all, the pledge was written in the late 1800s and the “under God” part wasn’t added until the 1950s--while believing that reading accused criminals and terrorists their rights (because, ya know, the Constitution, which you used to teach at a prestigious law school requires it), is a dangerous and silly idea only supported by mushy liberals.

White privilege is being able to be a gun enthusiast and not make people immediately scared of you.

White privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto was “Alaska first,” and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you're black and your spouse merely fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think she’s being disrespectful.

White privilege is being able to make fun of community organizers and the work they do--like, among other things, fight for the right of women to vote, or for civil rights, or the 8-hour workday, or an end to child labor--and people think you’re being pithy and tough, but if you merely question the experience of a small town mayor and 18-month governor with no foreign policy expertise beyond a class she took in college--you’re somehow being mean, or even sexist.

White privilege is being able to convince white women who don’t even agree with you on any substantive issue to vote for you and your running mate anyway, because all of a sudden your presence on the ticket has inspired confidence in these same white women, and made them give your party a “second look.”

White privilege is being able to fire people who didn’t support your political campaigns and not be accused of abusing your power or being a typical politician who engages in favoritism, while being black and merely knowing some folks from the old-line political machines in Chicago means you must be corrupt.

White privilege is being able to attend churches over the years whose pastors say that people who voted for John Kerry or merely criticize George W. Bush are going to hell, and that the U.S. is an explicitly Christian nation and the job of Christians is to bring Christian theological principles into government, and who bring in speakers who say the conflict in the Middle East is God’s punishment on Jews for rejecting Jesus, and everyone can still think you’re just a good church-going Christian, but if you’re black and friends with a black pastor who has noted (as have Colin Powell and the U.S. Department of Defense) that terrorist attacks are often the result of U.S. foreign policy and who talks about the history of racism and its effect on black people, you’re an extremist who probably hates America.

White privilege is not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is when asked by a reporter, and then people get angry at the reporter for asking you such a “trick question,” while being black and merely refusing to give one-word answers to the queries of Bill O’Reilly means you’re dodging the question, or trying to seem overly intellectual and nuanced.

White privilege is being able to claim your experience as a POW has anything at all to do with your fitness for president, while being black and experiencing racism is, as Sarah Palin has referred to it a “light” burden.

And finally, white privilege is the only thing that could possibly allow someone to become president when he has voted with George W. Bush 90 percent of the time, even as unemployment is skyrocketing, people are losing their homes, inflation is rising, and the U.S. is increasingly isolated from world opinion, just because white voters aren’t sure about that whole “change” thing. Ya know, it’s just too vague and ill-defined, unlike, say, four more years of the same, which is very concrete and certain.

White privilege is, in short, the problem.

"The Express" Path to Racial Equality

by Dr. Boyce Watkins

www.BoyceWatkins.com

“The Express” is a new film featuring the great Ernie Davis, one of the most amazing college athletes in American History and the first African American to win the Heisman Trophy. He was also a football player for Syracuse University, the campus on which I teach.

I watched the trailer for the film with pride, feeling good about this man and what he accomplished. I saw all the ads, the banners around campus, the website pictures and other excitement as the city prepared for the film’s premiere. I then had a couple of thoughts.
First, I thought about the residual impact of historical racism. Most of the time, when liberal universities talk about racism, the context is one in which racism is something that happened “back then”, and “we are all better now”. The conversation is one of (relatively justifiable) celebration for just how far our nation has come in the fight for social justice.

What is most ironic about this analysis is that it forgets one important fact: the past is not something that existed once and then disappeared. The past is all around us. The present and past CANNOT be disconnected because the present is created by the past, and the past consistently manifests itself in the social infrastructure of our institutions. For example, in the days of Ernie Davis (not that long ago), African Americans were rarely allowed onto my campus (along with many others) and were certainly not allowed to be part of the decision-making bodies of these campuses. This led to a skewed inter-generational transfer of power that reflects itself in the vast degree of (in Georgetown University scholar Christopher Metzler’s words) “academic imperialism” that we see today. If you take a tour of most campuses, you see that there are few Black faces on the faculty, almost none of them tenured. Black students rarely have professors who look like themselves, as if their price of tuition is to embrace some degree of cultural dilution in their efforts to successfully assimilate. Black scholars are told that research on the Black community is “Ghetto scholarship” and effectively marginalized to departments that have little say in how the campus is run. The attitude is “This is our campus. History and tradition are everything here, and the tradition is that our rules apply and you need to just fit in where you can. We have no problem with you, as long as you remain grateful that we’ve allowed you into our house. Now, here’s a picture of one of our great black athletes to prove that we can’t be racist.”

The second thing I’ve noticed is what I call the “Old people effect” in dealing with historical racism. This effect is one that ideologically disconnects African Americans who attended college during the 60s and 70s from those who attended in the 90s and 00s. It is one where the campus shows tribute and respect to those who were mistreated 30 years ago, while simultaneously continuing the historical pattern of ostracism toward those who are the academic descendants of the older alumni. The “Old people effect” essentially says, “Yes, we will honor ex-athletes Art Monk and Ernie Davis, but they are nothing like the dangerous negroes Adam Banks and Boyce Watkins. Because we put a picture of Ernie Davis on our website, this clearly proves that we only hate the “bad” black men, which therefore justifies our desire to ostracize young African American scholars and students who choose to challenge our historical educational paradigm.” In other words, it’s like respecting the father of a family, but dishonoring him by beating his child. I am not sure there is any respect or honor in that. Also, one should realize that by honoring Davis and Monk but dishonoring their African American counterparts and intellectual descendants, you are effectively engaging in the historical act of celebrating well-behaved black athletes while demeaning progressive black intellectuals. The same can be said for the administrator who pats Carmello Anthony on the back while deliberately separating Anthony from the African American student activists across campus.

But truth be told, Syracuse is not much different from many campuses across America. The reality is that Americans are limited in our ability to fight racism, because many of us can’t even define it. We end up swinging at ghosts in the wind, believing that a more expensive Martin Luther King Celebration, attacking hate groups or inviting speakers from the Civil Rights era is our path to racial cleansing. The truth is that in order to truly fight institutionalized racism, you must be willing to engage in the painful act of surgically decomposing the subtle biases of your social, academic and economic infrastructure like a doctor committed to fighting cancer. The cancer of historical racism festers among us and, in some ways, has the greatest impact on those who truly believe they’ve been cured. Ineffective fights against racism (like giving a cancer patient the wrong drugs) lead to deformed efforts to fulfill Dr. King’s Dream, thus turning the dream into an even greater and more elusive nightmare for those under the thumb of such oppression.

It is my hope that “The Express” will inspire us to get off the express train for racial equality. 400-year old habits die hard, and it takes more than 25 years of good intentions to correct them.

Dr. Boyce - Jesse Jackson Show Today

I am going to be on the Jesse Jackson Radio show this morning. I get the chance to appear on this show a lot, along with my good friend Marc Lamont Hill. I am glad to see Jesse back out there on the front lines of our conversations, we need him.

I hate the idea that we can be so willing to exchange all black leadership for a black president. Barack Obama is great, but he can't replace black leadership in America.

On a side note, I saw the movie "Batman" again last night. Heath Ledger's performance was amazing, and it was one of the best movies I've seen all year. So no, I am not always meditating on racial inequality every second of the day. However, I do give the Batman films kudos for a diverse representation of African Americans. I don't mind seeing black inmates in a film, but I enjoy the fact that Batman movies show us black police commissioners, black judges, and black scientists. That's certainly more than I can say for the film "Hancock", which showed black men as drunks and prison inmates. What was that all about?

Obama's New Yorker Cover: What it Tells Us

Dr. Boyce Watkins
www.BoyceWatkins.net
www.YourBlackWorld.com

Not sure if you guys have seen this cover of Barack and Michelle Obama on The New Yorker today, but here it is.



Those of you who know me know what I am thinking:

1) Black people should never purchase another copy of The New Yorker again, unless there is a retraction and full apology. Even then, they should be held accountable regarding how many African American writers and editors they have on staff.

2) This cover says at least two things: Being too black is a bad thing, and being a Muslim is just as bad. I don't believe that Senator Obama is a Muslim, but it is shameful that being a Muslim has become a crime in this country. It appears that black skin is acceptable, but black people receive acceptance into the establishment typically if they are docile and weak (hence, the whole "militant black woman" label you see on the cover). Many of you experience this kind of cultural dominance every day on the job. This, in my opinion, is the new racism of America. People don't hate you for having black skin. They hate you for having black cultural attributes that they do not understand (Remember when the boxer Joe Louis was given the list of appropriate Negro behavior when he became a pro? America loved him because he followed the list).

3) This re-emphasizes the need for more black-owned media. This election has been distorted because there are no black voices to counter those of Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity. Hence, our voices are either muted or distorted, and we end up having to "shoosh" one another to ensure that the media doesn't find out that black people really have something to be angry about. That kind of sickens me.

4) Someone asked me to explain why I am voting for Obama. Here is the answer: 1) He is electable. 2) He is intelligent. 3) He is better than McCain (anyone is). 4) I respect strong, intelligent brothers. 5) The rest of the world hates our guts and he can help fix that problem. 6) Michelle Obama is one of the most intellectually beautiful people I've ever seen, and I am hopeful that she can keep Barack honest. My frustrations with Barack are similar to my frustrations with some hip hop artists: They both end up doing silly things in response to pressure from the racists they are trying to appease. If they were behaving according to free will, they would likely be doing something entirely different. Racism makes all of us do things that are humiliating to our people and ultimately divisive, and as long as we are chasing corporate, political and financial carrots, we will always be a slave to this tap dance. I am no exception, but I strive each day to break out of that pattern.


5) Congrats to another beautiful black woman, Cynthia McKinney, who just secured the Green Party nomination. Her platform is quite compelling, and she deserves an honest look from all of us. I suggest that when it comes to all candidates, we look at a list of the issues and make decisions based on whether the candidate appears to be willing to support the agenda that works best for our community (whatever that means to you). We should also remember that when it comes to politicians, if we ask for nothing, we will get nothing. So, don't be afraid to ask for political accountability (even if you think that Barack is the Black Baby Jesus).

Was Hancock Racist? A Little Bit - Dr Boyce Watkins

First, I should start by saying that I loved the movie "Hancock". Will Smith is definitely the king of the box office, and I am proud of watching his career grow from nothingness, bankruptcy-ness, to all-that-and-a-bag-of-chips-edness, in one Superman swoop. Big Willy is actually a brilliant man, probably a genius, and I give him credit for that.

But I couldn't help but feel just a little uneasy during this film and I was not sure why. I eventually determined that the little itch in my butt was the fact that this film was, perhaps accidentally, one of the more racist Hollywood depictions I've seen in a while.

I was hesitant to make a big deal about this, since I can laugh away offensive stuff as much as anyone else. Believe it or not, I see manifestations of our country's 400 year addiction to white supremacy everywhere I go: just look at the corporations you work for and count the number of white male vs. black male managers. Check out your university and count the number of black professors you had, then count the number that had tenure (probably zero). So, this stuff is real, there is no way to excuse away the impacts of 400 years of bad behavior. So, like Hancock, the damaged superhero, our country also possesses some heroic capability with a little too much nasty cultural baggage.

I thought I might express my concerns for "Hancock" in a few questions. Answer them in any way you wish, but I certainly feel these questions should be laid on the table for discussion. With the history of racism in Hollywood, answering these questions might help Hollywood find more productive ways to realize Martin Luther King's dream that all Superheroes will hold hands and attend the Legion of Justice together. Right now, none of our genius, millionaire, well-kept, polite super heroes would want to hold hands with Hancock. They'd be more likely to want to put him in prison.

1) Is it just a coincidence that first Black superhero just happens to be a dirty, smelly, alcoholic who treats people like crap? Hancock was more like a corner bum than a hero (remember when he took the liquor bottle to the bathroom?).

2) Is it just a coincidence that a clean cut white man comes along to save him? Go watch movies like "Amistad" and "A Time to Kill" to see many other examples in which the white male is clean and heroic, while the black male character is strong, yet misguided, uneducated or in need of saving. This clearly links to history, in which Europeans would go to Africa to "enlighten the savages".

3) Did you notice that when Hancock was engaging in anti-social, erratic behavior, the film played hip hop music? I remember hearing "Move Bitch Get out tha way!" (Ludacris) as Hancock was flying through the expressway with a liquor bottle and destroying public property. Then, when he went to prison, I heard Ice-T's "Colors" being played in the background. Interesting.

4) What's the deal with Hancock having to go to prison before the public chooses to accept him? Is there any other superhero movie in which the hero goes to prison? Of course when he went to prison, Hollywood suddenly turned black. Prison scenes provide lots of employment opportunities for black male actors. Honestly, I think with all the real life examples of black men going to prison, we don't need black kids seeing super heroes going to the penitentiary too.

5) Did the press conference scene, in which Hancock was humbly submitting himself to the American public remind you of Terrell Owens of the Dallas Cowboys giving that sad little boy speech a couple of years ago? Like Owens, Smith was standing as the tall, muscular black man, next to the short white guy in a business suit, there to teach him how to be sophisticated, professional and presentable to the public. Owens never committed any crime, people just thought that he had "poor character". Interesting.

Whether we like it or not, Hancock may have been a super hero manifestation of the experience of many superstar black male athletes in America: "Sure we think you're a great athlete, but we just don't feel that your character is appropriate." Ever notice that the most hated athlete in America is almost always a black man? Terrell Owens, Michael Vick, Lattrell Sprewell, Ron Artest, Muhammad Ali, Jack Johnson. This "King Kong done went bad" mentality that Americans have toward strong or angry black males is a symptom of racism that is a bit too difficult to ignore.

Actually, it even reminds me of my experience here at Syracuse University, where people are forced to acknowledge me, but because I speak on behalf of black males (sometimes in direct or unapologetic vernacular), my actions and words are not deemed worthy of accurate and equitable interpretation. Rather, I am sure some of my colleagues deem me to be some sort of "intellectual thug", certainly not worthy of the pristine academic cocoon in which we take so much comfort. So, the experience of Hancock is quite similar to the experience of the black boy in the school system that defines him as having a behavioral disorder, the prison inmate who gets longer sentences for the same crimes, the black professional who is deemed unworthy of promotion, or the black scholar who tells Bill O'Reilly to kiss his butt. It's all the same Matrix, just different versions of it.

I won't even get into the complicated discussion about Charlize Theron's role in the film. That would be for another conversation.

Do I feel that the film "Hancock" was a reflection of racism in America? Absolutely. But I admit that I enjoyed it. So, I am as conflicted as everyone else.

Don Imus, Black American Protest: Contact Information for Imus

Here is the contact information for the producers of Imus in the Morning. Here is a form letter you can use when you write them via email. Here is a link to an email you can use to forward this message to anyone else you feel might Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey, BET, Hip Hop vs. America, rapperswant to fight this issue.

Mail:
[Same as street address]
Phone:Fax:
(212) 613-3800(212) 613-3866
Street:
2 Penn Plz17th FlNew York, NY 10121
Home Page:Email:
http://www.wabcradio.com/webmaster@wabcradio.com


Anderson, Bruce PM Drive-Time On Air Personality (212) 613-3800 (212) 613-3823 webmaster@wabcradio.com

Bartlett, Rob AM Drive-Time On Air Personality (212) 268-5730 (212) 613-3866 webmaster@wabcradio.com

Bonk, Lisa Advertising Sales Manager (212) 613-3888 (212) 613-3866 lisa.bonk@citcomm.com

Borneman, Steve President & General Manager (212) 613-3801 (212) 613-3866 steve.borneman@citcomm.com

Boyce, Phil News Director (212) 613-3805 (212) 613-3866 phil.boyce@citcomm.com

Boyce, Phil Operations Manager (212) 613-3805 (212) 613-3866 phil.boyce@citcomm.com

Boyce, Phil Programming President (212) 613-3805 (212) 613-3866 phil.boyce@citcomm.com

Foster, Karith AM Drive-Time On Air Personality (212) 268-5730 (212) 613-3866 webmaster@wabcradio.com

Gigante, Robert Late Night On Air Personality (212) 613-3800 (212) 613-3866 grant@wabcradio.com

Hannity, Sean PM Drive-Time On Air Personality (212) 301-3554 (212) 613-3866 hannity@foxnews.com

Imus, Don AM Drive-Time On Air Personality (212) 613-3800 (212) 613-3866 webmaster@wabcradio.com

Levin, Mark Late Night On Air Personality (212) 268-5730 (212) 613-3866 mark.levin@citcomm.com

Maldonado, Jack Sports Director (212) 613-3863 (212) 613-3866 webmaster@wabcradio.com

McCord, Charles AM Drive-Time On Air Personality (212) 268-5730 (212) 613-3866 webmaster@wabcradio.com

Powell, Tony AM Drive-Time On Air Personality (212) 268-5730 (212) 613-3866 webmaster@wabcradio.com

Slender, Leslie Marketing Director (212) 613-3800 (212) 613-3866 leslie.slender@citcomm.com

Slender, Leslie Promotion Director (212) 613-3800 (212) 613-3866 leslie.slender@citcomm.com

Sliwa, Curtis Mid-Day On Air Personality (212) 613-3872 (212) 613-3866 webmaster@wabcradio.com

Winek, Linda Web Site Contact (212) 613-3802 (212) 613-3866 linda.winek@citcomm.com

Wolf, Warner AM Drive-Time On Air Personality (212) 613-3800 (212) 613-3866 warner.wolf@citcomm.com

“Divisive Hate Speech”: Why this Term is Silly

by Dr. Boyce Watkins

http://www.boycewatkins.com/

As I work to do my part toward the fair treatment of African Americans, I can't recall how many emails I've received from well-intended, yet uninformed individuals who presume that my words are nothing more than "divisive hate speech". It doesn't matter what I say, or how I say it. As long as I bring up the impact that slavery and oppression has on the present, I am accused of using "divisive hate speech". When I bring up the fact that slavery, oppression and economic exclusion have created the massive wealth gap between blacks and whites in America, I am accused of using "divisive hate speech". When I mention the disproportionate black male prison population (an artifact of Jim Crow and slavery) or the lack of tenured faculty at majority universities, I am again accused of "divisive hate speech".

I now ignore that line in any email I receive. To use that term in response to being confronted with slavery is like an irresponsible father getting angry every time his child's mother reminds him to pay child support. Reconciliation for extraordinary damage and devastation comes with a price. You can't just wish it away.

I know how to look past the critics, they don't bother me. But for some reason, that term (divisive hate speech) was in my brain when I woke up this morning, and I wanted to share some thoughts with those who are bothered by such a criticism. Part of the price of admission for African Americans into so-called "mainstream America" is that we must do our ancestors a huge disgrace by remaining quiet about the atrocities they've experienced. If you spend just one day thoroughly studying the impact of slavery and the experience of some of the slaves, you wouldn't think for one second that it is ok to forget what they went through.

The reason the term "divisive hate speech" is silly in response to any African American who speaks up on racism is because it is reflective of the lack of personal responsibility that our country teaches when it comes to dealing with the impact of slavery and discrimination. If I am wealthy because my father raped my best friend's mother and stole her belongings, it would be irresponsible for me to say "that's divisive hate speech!" whenever my friend attempts to have my family held accountable for the actions of my father. In that scenario, if I am forcing my friend to remain silent about what happened to his mother as a condition for our friendship, then the truth is that he is not my friend at all. The secondary truth is that I do not respect my friend nor love him enough to make things right after what my family has done.

African Americans are in the same situation. My precondition for being accepted by my colleagues in the academy is for me to remain silent about the raping, castration, murder, robbery and torture of my own family members during slavery. If you can go with me for a second (close your eyes and really imagine this for me), imagine having your siblings taken away forever at the age of 6, seeing your mother raped in front of you or watching your father beaten and eventually killed. That gives you a tiny glimpse into the life of a slave.

The secondary reality that comes from treating another group of people like this for 400 years (that's nearly half a millennium, a very long time to form cultural habits) is that the oppressive group is going to feel comfortable oppressing the minority group. The minority group is going to feel comfortable being oppressed and victimized. I refuse to be a victim, so I am fighting back. Fighting back and refusing to be victimized is what leads to a rejection by the group that is comfortable oppressing minorities. It also leads to a rejection by those in the oppressed group who have grown comfortable remaining silent about the truth. That partially explains the term "divisive hate speech". In fact, I recall hearing an esteemed black colleague of mine tell his superior that "racism doesn't exist in his organization", when privately, he knows that his company has not promoted a black man in 40 years. That is the kind of sick, twisted lie that many African Americans are forced to live, all in the name of "not appearing divisive".

Another reason it is irresponsible to use a term like "divisive hate speech" to describe any man or woman's desire to discuss the impact of slavery is that the truth MUST BE CONFRONTED IF YOU ARE TO MOVE FORWARD. A fat man who is challenged to exercise might want to say "Exercise is painful and unfair!" But he should understand that without exercise, he is going to remain fat. America is that fat man. Every time the term "divisive hate speech" is used as an attempt to silence those who speak out on race, Americans are behaving like the fat man who doesn't have the discipline to exercise. He should realize that confronting his weight problem is the only way he is going to get healthy. Making bad choices in the past (or perhaps his mother feeding him the wrong food) implies that he ABSOLUTELY MUST endure the pain to achieve the gain. There is no way around it.

For the overweight man in my example above to think that he can achieve the gain without enduring a period of discomfort and sacrifice would be both weak and irresponsible. That is what many Americans want. They want racial harmony without the responsibility of true reconciliation and accountability.

That is something I refuse to accept. So, from this point on, the term "divisive hate speech" is officially deemed silly and counterproductive. If you want to criticize me, you have to come at me with something better than that.

Barack and the Election: My morning thought

I had a morning thought today, as I slept like a baby last night. It was in response to a question about an article I recently wrote for BlackProf.com, a site for black professors. The question was quite valid: What would I do if I were in Barack Obama's position?

The question and reply are cut and paste below. I should begin by saying that I remain adamant about the fact that many interpret black love to imply white hate. But that is what oppression is all about. If a husband is used to raping and beating his wife without resistance, any resistance that occurs is going to be interpreted as a violation of his rights. I have had thousands of white students over my 15 years as a professor, and I've loved every single one of them (except one guy in 1998....he was (excuse my Chinese) an asshole). People don't realize that calling me a racist for standing up for black people is actually the conditioned psychological training they've received from a highly racist society. Fear of labeling by people of color keeps us from doing what is right.


The black community is in shambles, this is because of 400 years of slavery and oppression. If making that statement and fighting to fix the situation has me labeled as a racist, then so be it. But recall: a man who sues the family of the man who raped, murdered and robbed his mother is not a rapist and thief himself. That is the flaw in that logic.

The email is below. Enjoy!

Reader Comment to me

I believe Barrack has been wittingly placed between a rock and a hard stone i.e.

Either have his candidacy racialized (process that is already in motion) and lose the nomination or election for sure.
or
Renounce his blackness and win ‘mainstream’ validation, then maybe just maybe “they” might give him the ‘prize’.

Given the dilemma, I believe Barrack needs more empathy than castigation from “his people”.

Maybe I should ask Dr. Watkins and Terrez this question. What would you or should anyone do if in Barrack’s position?

Seize a once in a life time opportunity of becoming president (a milestone in the history of African Americans and Americans at large) and publicly disown any form of blackness that make the white mainstream uncomfortable - no matter how true - the truth does hurt?
Mind you, they have the numbers (votes) and everything does come with a price.

Or


Forego the opportunity of becoming president because you woun’t lose the “black thang”? White will never understand why AA can’t get over their past and embrace (like other Americans) the “can’t-we-just-get-along” philosophy.

Mind you America might one day elect a latino, asian or native american president and AA’s might live to ‘regret’ the opportunity they missed of “making it in the big leagues”.


[reply this comment]

Boyce Watkins reply on June 3, 2008:

You may click on your name and/or comment to edit. ( 11 minutes)

Hey brother (or sister),

you make a very good point, one that I agree with 100%. I don’t demonize Obama for his choices, per se. I only ask: where does one draw the line? If a woman wants to desperately get married, does she drop her panties for every man that comes along?

I make that strong analogy above because there is a mentality in the black community that says that white validation means everything. Obama will get far more respect for being President than he ever would for being a strong black leader and helping black children. I would get far more respect for being president of Harvard than I would for being president of Spelman College.

One cannot fight oppression and simultaneously remain addicted to the need for validation from the oppressor. Black people NEED whites to tell us that we are smart, that we are good, that we are important. That is why we consider being President of the United States to be one of the, if not the most significant achievement in history for a black man. I do not agree. If a wife is being abused by her husband, she can’t say “get your damn hands off me” and then turn around and say “Do you still think I’m pretty?”

If the wife above can’t find a safe place to keep her self-esteem, her abusive husband is going to use that against her. White America does that to black america. When we do things they find objectionable, they collectively say to us, “you see, that’s why we think you people are savages.” We then work hard to adjust our behavior because we fear being told that we are not pretty enough for our oppressor. I even saw where one brother on this blog mentioned being “embarrassed” by the behavior of other African Americans. On the other hand, I rarely hear white males show any concern for how they are perceived by us.



You asked what I would do if I were in Obama’s difficult position: I would figure out where I am going to draw the line. I am not sure if any Jewish candidate would allow the American people to force him to denounce someone who speaks out against those who claim the holocaust never happened. A Jewish candidate would not denounce someone who believed in unconditional support for Israel. I doubt any Jewish candidate would miss the birthday celebration of Rabbi Leo Baeck or Dr. Otto Hirsch, great leaders during the Nazi Holocaust. However, Obama felt comfortable missing the 40th anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr because he was worried about what white America would think about him attending this legitimate event.

As African Americans, we have to figure out where our own line of self-respect is going to be drawn. The presidency is not worth teaching every black child in America to give away their dignity to obtain it. I would be just as proud of Obama if he were to drop out of the race and use his amazing fundraising ability to raise half a billion dollars to educate thousands of black youth at an HBCU. That would have a far more direct and powerful impact on the black community, in my opinion, than being another president who embraces the same old policies as the presidents before him.

I am sure Obama knows where he is drawing his line. As this election progresses, I am curious to see if he ever takes any stand against the attacks of the right wing. From what I’m hearing from journalists behind closed doors, the attacks are only going to get more vicious. Michelle Obama is next on the list, and the attacks are going to paint her as a racist. For some reason, many associate black love to imply white hate. Again, that is the same double standard we’ve always dealt with: when we integrate and demand fairness, people claim that we are co-dependent whiners. When we become independent and work toward unity, strength and self-love, we are called racists. The bottom line is that this country has been trained to hate us, and there are some who will get angry at us no matter what we do. That’s why we must learn to truly love ourselves. If we do that, then we can reintegrate into white America from a position of strength.

OK, this is my morning thought. Now it’s time to get back to work!

Joshua Packwood: Morehouse College's White Valedictorian - How Cool is that?

People have asked me what I think about the fact that the great Morehouse College, one of the top 3 universities in America, has just made a white man its valedictorian for the first time in school history. Joshua Packwood is the young man to achieve this great distinction, as being valedictorian at Morehouse or Spelman is every bit as challenging as doing the same thing at Harvard, Yale or Stanford.

I can only start by saying: How cool is that?

Not only do I have tremendous respect for Joshua Packwood, but I have respect for any student who fully embraces the importance of academic excellence. Morehouse and Spelman are as competitive as you can get, as Spelman is the top university in America. Morehouse is simply Morehouse, a place that only produces academic champions. There are some things to learn from seeing this young man succeed at Morehouse (or any great HBCU for that matter).

I noticed that in this young man's background, there were black folks who played a strong role in raising him. The same was true of my best friend, a Jewish kid who could have been a guest on Def Comedy Jam. The common trend is that 9 times out of 10, when a white individual is comfortable around black people, chances are that he was not raised as the typical white person in America: perhaps he is from overseas, he grew up around black people, or he had strong liberal parents who ensured that he was exposed to black culture. For example, Jon Karpoff, one of the top financial scholars in America, has a similar comfort with people of color, all of it rooted in the fact that his parents were sure to expose him and his brother to people of color. This makes Jon and his brother Fred, easy to respect and understand, because you don't have to spend all your time helping them overcome a bunch of silly preconcieved notions about black people that they learned from watching Fox News.


The Joshua Packwood/Morehouse situation says something about race in America, and how people are raised. Many whites seem to feel that attending an HBCU would be as scary as going to prison. Some would expect that they were getting an inferior education, or perhaps get carjacked in the middle of the night. In general, there are many whites who would never feel comfortable in a room full of black people. On the other hand, there are many people of color who feel incredibly comfortable attending college at a predominantly white institution. I find that to be somewhat ironic.

Another professor I had in college mentioned his experience as a visiting scholar at Morehouse. As a white man, he said that this was the first time he'd ever known what it could be like to be a minority in America. Perhaps everyone in America should attend Morehouse or Spelman for a while: Not only would they get a powerful education, they would be educated outside the classroom as well.

Congrats to Joshua Packwood, way to go brother!

Dr. Boyce Watkins is the founder of YourBlackWorld.com and author of "What if George Bush were a Black Man?". Please subscribe.

Barack Obama Denouncing Again, Quick thoughts

I woke up this morning to gobs of email from the lovers and haters of the piece I wrote supporting Father Michael Pfleger in the latest of Barack Obama's racial problems. I also read this morning that Senator Obama has denounced the Trinity United Church of Christ and all the individuals in that church who have supported him all these years. This reminds me of the superstar athlete who is told to leave "the hood" and not associate with friends and relatives who supported him when he was just a scrub. It was the love and support of the people of Illinois that got Obama's career going, I am not sure how I feel about his denunciation of his church home.

That led to some quick thoughts I have on the matter.

1) Why hasn't Hillary Clinton been asked to denounce any of her friends who speak strongly about race? In fact, didn't Condoleeza Rice say something racially controversial recently? Perhaps President Bush should be asked to start denouncing also. It seems to me that America simply wants to make sure that Barack Obama is not "too black to be President." This appears to be a social clensing, the same that many of us go through in middle class Black America.



2) Why doesn't Senator Obama just cut to the chase and denounce all of us? I think that might make things easier, since there are hundreds of thousands of African-Americans who agree wholeheartedly with Pastor Jeremiah Wright. It might seem that simply getting rid of the entire black community would give him fewer headaches. Black people are just too much damn trouble.

3) How would the Jews feel if America refused to acknowledge the holocaust? What if America had no desire to protect or support Israel from hostile forces in the middle east, claiming that anti-semitism is "just a myth" that they made up? I don't believe, for one second, that anti-semitism is a myth, but perhaps that puts things into context when understanding why African-Americans are so livid over America's lack of willingness to be honest about racism. America has not even apologized for the 400 year holocaust on black families, and they get angry when we bring it up. If this were done to the Jewish community, they would be outraged.

Those are my thoughts. I still stand by Jeremiah Wright, Father Michael Pfleger and Senator Barack Obama. They are my brothers in truth, and unlike the McCarthyists on the other side, they will end up on the right side of history.

Video below: Dr. Boyce speaks on Barack Obama leaving Trinity

Liz Trotta's Death Wish on Barack Obama: What Fox News Needs to Do

As you know, Liz Trotta, a Fox News Analyst, made a joke about her desire to see Senator Barack Obama killed. This is no joke, this is serious. I don't think I ever thought, in my lifetime, that a major news network would have an analyst joking about killing the possible future President of the United States.

Senator Barack Obama is already getting threats from domestic terrorists who want him dead. Even my death threats are being taken very seriously by the police, so I can't imagine what Senator Obama must be feeling. The fact is that we must deal with the reality that Liz Trotta's words were a CRIME. The federal authorities should investigate this and prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. The mere suggestion by a leader in media that someone should be killed is REAL. When Bill O'Reilly attacks me, his thousands of minions take his words overboard, calling my house all hours of the night, threatening to do terrible things to me. So, whether it is Bill O'Reilly, Liz Trotta, Sean Hannity or some other bigot on national television, the fact is that this kind of activity CANNOT go on ignored.

Fox Analyst Wants Barack Obama Dead

Wow.....we now have a major network with analysts who are hoping that Barack Obama gets assassinated. If anyone didn't understand why we are going hard after Fox News in our protest, now you understand why. Liz Trotta is the woman committing the federal crime that occurs on the set of Fox News below.

Here's the video.




Those of you who continue to defend this behavior can now officially shut up. Your ability to argue in support of the actions of the right wing have now been invalidated.

Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and other members of the "Axis of Ignorance", have continued to condone this type of social terrorism that reminds us just how racist our country continues to be. Bill O'Reilly joked a couple of months ago about "having a lynching party" on Michelle Obama, and now an analyst on the same network literally states that "if we could", we would wipe Barack Obama off the face of the earth.



As a black man who receives death threats every single week for my words, I can't explain to you how it feels to see major networks in the "mainstream" hoping for men like yourself to be killed. I can't possibly explain the challenge of being ostracized by my colleagues for speaking the truth on racism. Were it not for the encouraging words of supporters outside of my campus (including a nice phone call from the daughter of Syracuse alum Jim Brown), I would truly feel like I was on a suicide mission, at least professionally and perhaps physically.

This commentary is not off the cuff....it's not just "silly analysis"....it is a reflection on exactly where our country stands as it pertains to race, and I am sick and tired of pandering to the horrifically sick attitudes of individuals who don't want to deal with the truth.

Racism is alive and well in America. Even Hillary Clinton is noting that race is giving her an advantage in the election. Barack Obama is afraid to tell the truth on this matter, because he knows that any mention of race will cause him to lose votes. But I am not running for office and I am not being paid, so unlike Senator Obama, I am going to give you the truth.

US Code 18 Chapter 19, Section 373(a) of the Federal Criminal Code reads as follows:

(a) Whoever, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against property or against the person of another in violation of the laws of the United States, and under circumstances strongly corroborative of that intent, solicits, commands, induces, or otherwise endeavors to persuade such other person to engage in such conduct, shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half of the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the crime solicited, or both; or if the crime solicited is punishable by life imprisonment or death, shall be imprisoned for not more than twenty years.

Please join the YourBlackWorld Protest Against Bill O'Reilly and Fox News

Please join Your Black World: The top black news and commentary site in America.

How I can Always Tell When I was on the O'Reilly Factor

I don't ask my friends when Bill O'Reilly talks about me. Most of my friends don't watch Bill's show, and have little respect for him. But even as I continue to ignore this little man like an angry 4 year old, he continues to put his little disciples on the job. I give it up to Bill, he's got his cyborgs in check. When he says "Get that negro!" His followers get right on the job. Perhaps my actions have qualified me for the "lynching party" he wanted to put on Michelle Obama. Such a comment clearly implies that Bill O'Reilly hates our great nation. Discussion of lynching the possible first lady, putting her in a concentration camp or any other kind of crazy hate speech has no place in our country.

The chart above shows the spike in traffic to my homepage that occurred on an otherwise boring Friday night on Memorial Day Weekend. My personal webpage usually has about 1,000 visitors a day, and YourBlackWorld has another 6,000 or so. But I can always tell when Bill O'Reilly was screaming my name.


Along with a slew of interesting emails, I also received a nice phone call from someone who called me a "fat monkey nigger", or some other entertaining descriptor. Yes, I have been gaining weight, so maybe he has a point...except for the monkey nigger part. I would prefer to be described as a "fat, hunky sex machine".

I hope he doesn't have some kind of fatal attraction toward me, since I don't roll like that. Either way, I've rarely seen Bill O'Reilly, nor anyone else so obsessed with someone who doesn't even return his phone calls. But then again, I guess intelligent black men have that effect on racists like Bill O'Reilly. I am an honest believer that educated black men are Bill O'Reilly's worst nightmare, which is why he has gone so hard after Barack Obama.

Keep screaming Bill....you and I both know what's going on.

Barack Obama’s Trip to Kentucky: The Ultimate Plantation

by Dr. Boyce Watkins
www.BoyceWatkins.com

In the writing of my book, “What if George Bush Were a Black Man?”, I spent a great deal of time talking about my experience growing up in Kentucky. Kentucky is nothing like the unfair stereotypes presented by Hollywood: images of hillbillies in straw hats, running moonshine on horseback with no shoes. However, when given a chance to defy stereotypes and prove that it has moved beyond its commitment to racism, the state usually fails with flying colors.

This week, Senator Barack Obama was pummeled in Kentucky by Senator Hillary Clinton. While voting against Obama is no proof of racism, the truth is that many voters admitted that they voted against Obama because he was black. Even Hillary knows this, as she continues to brag about how she has support among “hard working whites without a college degree.” Kentuckians do work hard, many of them are white and the state is one of the worst in the country when it comes to education. So, these must be Hillary Clinton’s kind of people.


Race still matters in Kentucky, a fact that throws itself in my face every time I return to my home state to give a speech. The last speech I gave at The University of Kentucky led to my not getting a handshake from the mayor, nor many other dignitaries who’d greeted me so graciously when I arrived. It wasn’t because I said anything radical: I simply noted (quite precisely I must admit) that the campus stated in 1990 that it would dramatically increase the presence of black faculty, and as of 2005, they’d had a net increase of 1. Not 1%, just 1. I wanted to tell the university that killing the messenger, while fitting with tradition, would be counter productive. Rather, they should kick themselves for not having the personal responsibility to keep their commitments.

I stated what much of Kentucky already understands: there is an equilibrium in which black people are second class citizens in Kentucky and when this equilibrium is violated, people get upset. There is an expectation of weakness, fear and silence among the black community in Kentucky, and my violation of the “Good negro behavior protocol” led to a backlash from those who “don’t want your kind round here”.

I love my state, but that is why I must be honest in my assessment.


I grew up in the school system in Kentucky, one that destroys the dreams of black children by the boat load, tossing them into classes for the learning disabled at dramatic rates and killing their dreams of going to college. I recall confronting the counselor of my god daughter, who tried to explain to me why “college isn’t for everyone”, while the kids at the suburban schools with equal intelligence are sent to the next level. What was most sad was that the counselor was black.

I went to college at The University of Kentucky, a campus that continues to make excuses for not hiring black faculty, yet is always able to somehow find the next great black basketball player. I once saw two pictures in the law school: one of the faculty, one of the janitorial staff. One of the pictures was 100% white, the other, 100% black.

I still have family in Kentucky, where black people truly know their place. The Kentucky Derby is not an event for everyone to celebrate at the track: it’s the day where most black people either clean up the horse crap or barbecue in their mama’s backyard.

People don’t get upset about the way things are in Kentucky, they are trained to accept it. High powered whites are the jockeys, and people of color are the horses. Any black person accepted into higher circles must be socially neutered in order to gain admission. No radical negroes are allowed in the country club.

Muhammad Ali was treated so poorly in the state of Kentucky that he refused to return for years. 12 years ago, when a black female student was attacked at The University of Kentucky in a racially-motivated incident, she claimed that campus administrators asked her to remain quiet because the basketball team had made it to the Final Four. You know, the whole bad publicity thing.

What is most ironic that I spent most of my time in Louisville and Lexington, two of the most socially-progressive cities in the state. It sort of goes down hill from there.

I had a mentor at The University of Kentucky, Tommy Whittler, the only black professor they’d tenured in the entire business school in their 130 year history. Tommy, and others, gave me good honest advice. They said, “Boyce, if you’re ever going to advance in this world, you have GOT to leave Kentucky.”



So, I left Kentucky and I advanced. I left that state for the same reasons that Senator Barack Obama never campaigned there in the first place. Now, I come home and everyone is afraid of me. That includes some of the black people, who may get upset that my honesty on racial equality is going to “get them into trouble.” It doesn’t matter if my words are true, it only matters that they are traumatic. But call me crazy, I still love my home state. That is why I want it to be cured of the disease of racism.

One thing I can say about the state of Kentucky is that the people are fundamentally good. The “country boy” who refuses to vote for a black presidential candidate is also the guy who will fix your car for free and allow his kids to play at your house. He cheers for the black guys on the University of Kentucky basketball team, even though he never thought about going to college. Ultimately, he represents the great paradox of Kentucky that creates racial inequality. Both the whites and the blacks are victims of this sickness.

I love my home state, and I would love to move back. But when I come home and see the same old oppression, I want to run for the airport. When I wrote my book about Kentucky and spoke of growing up there, I wrote from a position of intense pain.

The bluegrass state is beautiful, but it almost stole my dreams. Kentucky continues to be a dream killer for African Americans.

Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University and author of “What if George Bush were a Black Man?” He does regular commentary in national media, including CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS and ESPN. For more information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com.

United Nations to Send Special Observer to US to Deal with American Racism

Fri May 16, 2008 2:48pm EDT
By Stephanie Nebehay, Friends of the Congo

GENEVA (Reuters) - A special U.N. human rights investigator will visit the United States this month to probe racism, an issue that has forced its way into the race to secure the Democratic Party's presidential nomination.

The United Nations said Doudou Diene would meet federal and local officials, as well as lawmakers and judicial authorities during the May 19-June 6 visit.
"The special rapporteur will...gather first-hand information on issues related to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance," a U.N. statement said on Friday.

His three-week visit, at U.S. government invitation, will cover eight cities -- Washington D.C., New York, Chicago, Omaha, Los Angeles, New Orleans, Miami and San Juan, Puerto Rico.



Race has become a central issue in the U.S. election cycle because Sen. Barack Obama, the frontrunner in the battle for the Democratic nomination battle, stands to become the country's first African American president.

His campaign has increased turnout among black voters but has also turned off some white voters in a country with a history of slavery and racial segregation.

Diene, a Senegalese lawyer who has served in the independent post since 2002, will report his findings to the U.N. Human Rights Council next year.

However, the United Nations has almost no clout when it comes to U.S. domestic affairs and is widely perceived by many as interfering. The United States is not among the 47 member states of the Geneva-based forum, but has observer status.

In a report last year he said Islamophobia had grown worldwide since the September 11 2001 attacks on the United States, carried out by al-Qaeda militants.

DEATH PENALTY



A U.N. panel which examined the U.S. record on racial discrimination last March urged the United States to halt racial profiling of Americans of Arab, Muslim and South Asian descent and to ensure immigrants and non-nationals are not mistreated.

It also said America should impose a moratorium on the death penalty and stop sentencing young offenders to life in prison until it can root out racial bias from its justice system.

Racial minorities were more likely than whites to be sentenced to death or to life without parole as juveniles, according to the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. It monitors compliance with an international treaty which Washington ratified in 1994.

U.S. officials told the body, made up of 18 independent experts, that they were combating hate crimes such as displays of hangman's nooses and police brutality against minorities.

Some 800 racially motivated incidents against people perceived to be Arab, Muslim, Sikh or South Asian had been investigated since the September 11 attacks, they said at the time.

Substantial progress had been made over the years in addressing disparities in housing, education, employment and health care, according to a U.S. report submitted to the talks.

(Additional reporting by Matt Bigg in Atlanta; Editing by Jonathan Lynn and Jon Boyle)



--
Become a Friend of the Congo
Ph: 1-888-584-6510
http://friendsofthecongo.org/action/index.php