NATIONAL BLACK MUSIC MONTH EVENTS in HARTFORD, CT area

NATIONAL BLACK MUSIC MONTH EVENTS in HARTFORD, CT area

See NMathis EDM on the Greater Hartford Arts Council banner/Joe Standart Portrait of America photo: downtown Hfd, 600 Main St between City Hall & the Wadsworth Atheneum: 30 seconds & 1:52 minutes into video: http://www.wfsb.com/video/19152182/
Thursday 2 July Joe Standart Portraie of amereica Exibitiion CT Cmsn on Culture & Tourism Gallery one constitution plaza 2d flr mon – Fri 9A – 4P

Opening Thursday 9 July 4:30/6:30P CCCT Gallery; Reception Spris 6:30/8:30P

Saturday 25 July 7P, Queen Ann Nzinga African Diaspora Concert, The Bushnell - Connecticut's Premier Performing Arts Center, Belding Theatre, 166 Capitol Avenue, Hartford CT 06106 860.747-9383 FREESaturday 22 August 8P w/Lynn Tracey’s band @ Tango 2935 Main Street, Glastonbury CT 860.657-4527, 860.212.0209, 860.231-0663

Saturday 5 September, 8pm The Many Colors of a Woman, Inc. Celebrates Women in Jazz @ The Many Colors of a W*O*M*A*N XXVI FREE Jazz Festival
Headlining: Nicki Mathis’Afrikan Amerikan Jazz New Millennium All Stars: Ricky Alfonso, Joe Fonda, Arti Dixson, Pat Harleston, Rozanne Levine, Dotti Anita Taylor, Deborah Weisz, Mark Whitecage; Special Guest Saskia Laroo Featuring Carla Dean, Dawn Dumas, & MORE TBA Hartford, CT.
CoSponsored by MCW, Inc., OPUS, Inc., SAND, Inc. Funded in part by The Evelyn W. Preston Memorial Fund, Bank of America Trustee; GHAC, MCW, Inc. Supported by Smith Whiley & Company, Cull Books, Jim Fentress. Open to the Public. Sponsors Invited. 860.231-0663, 860.429.6859

Monday 14 September 7P w/International Women In Jazz Choir, St Peter's Church, Lexington @ 54 St NYC 718.468-7376

Saturday 26 September, 8pm
The Many Colors of a W*O*M*A*N XXVII FREE Jazz Festival
Saint Joseph College, The Carol Autorino Center for Arts and
Humanities, Wheelchair Accessible
1678 Asylum Avenue, West Hartford CT, CT. 06117-2791
Map/directions: http://www.sjc.edu/content.cfm/pageid/264

Headlining: Nicki Mathis’ Afrikan Amerikan Jazz
Ricky Alfonso, Phil Bowler; Pat Harleston, Dotti Anita Taylor; Featuring: Carla Dean, Dawn Dumas, Latanya Ferrell; Amina Star & Rodney Decarlos Edwards’ string duo.
CoSponsored by MCW, Inc. Saint Joseph College, The Carol Autorino Center for Arts and Humanities, OPUS, Inc., SAND, Inc. Funded by MCW, Inc. Supported by Smith Whiley & Company, Cull Books. Open to the Public. Sponsors Invited. 860.231-0663, 860.231-5529, 860.429.6859 Dean photos

Thursday 12 November 5:30P An Evening with Gloria Reuben 3d annual WE CAN (Women End the Course of AIDS Now) event, The Pond House, Elizabeth Park, West Hartford hosted by CARC, featuring Nicki Mathis’ Afrikan Amerikan Jazz; 860.761-6699

As a New England States Touring (NEST) Roster artist, presenters applying to hire Nick Mathis may be eligible to receive grant funding that can cover up to 50% of artist fee. http://matchbook.org/ArtistProfile1.aspx?ProfileIdt1 BOOKING Information 860.231-0663 websites:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/nickmathis http://www.myspace.com/nickimathis

Producer, The Many Colors of a W*O*M*A*N Jazz Festival
http://themanycolorsofawomanincorporated.webs.com/apps/photos/album?albumid589469

New Boston Fund 2008 Individual Artist Fellowship/Greater Hartford Arts
Council Award Recipient.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/musicwoman/2008/08/27/Creative-Vocalists-Nicki-Mathis-and-Renee-Fiallos
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/musicwoman/2008/10/01/Metaphysics-of-Music
google Nicki Mathis Jazz

...If the looking glass were asked, Mirror, mirror on the wall who was the coolest of them all? The answer would be Nicki Mathis... Ken Flynn, El Paso Herald Post

Sing Everyday Eric Dolphy

A silver timbered Texan. Owen Mc Nally, Courant Music critic, Hartford, CT

…I just learned that you will be playing at the upcoming WE CAN event for the CARC! I am thrilled to have you be part of this wonderful program. Thank you so much for signing on....You made our PCSW gala last November a huge success and I'm bragging about you to anyone who will listen. Thanks! ... Teresa C. Younger Executive Director Permanent
Commission on the Status of Women

Lots of things contribute to the makings of a great female jazz singer, beside just a great singing voice: a stylishly graceful wardrobe, a laid back (but spunky) demeanor, and a connection with the audience. Ella Fitzgerald, Lena Horne, Nina Simone, Dinah Washington and Nancy Wilson all had (have)(sic) it and so, too, does Hartford's own Nicki Mathis. Robert Cooper, The Hartford Advocate

Dear Nikki, you are a Star of Bright Dimension Citizen Carrie S. Perry (Mayor) Hartford
CT
...and another new singer- and what a GEM! she counted off such a fast swing- I said to myself HUH? and she meant it! you knew where you wanted it Ms. Nick Mathis! Taught me somethin! Wow! your amazing! they LOVED you! I cant wait to hear more! Thank you for sharing that with us! ... LaRe, Jazz Fever Jam, Sugar Bar NYC

Thank you for performing at the Festival's Lunch and Evening Concert Series. We appreciated having Nicki Mathis' Afrikan Amerikan Jazz on our stage to engage and entertain audiences in downtown New Haven. We are glad to know that such diverse programming is possible in our region. Thank you again, Melissa Huber, Program Manager, 12th Annual International Arts & Ideas Festival

Read full post

Dr. Barbara Teer's Legacy Continues

Watch out "Hurricane Season" is coming soon - July 10‏

Dear friends,

Please click on the link below for news about an exciting event that is about to occur.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.nationalblacktheatre.org/


Read full post

Dr. Barbara Love on Frederick Douglass - a true leader (originally posted July 4th, 2008)

"Frederick Douglass (1817-1895) was the best known and most influential African American leader of the 1800s..."



Frederick Douglass (1817-1895) was the best known and most influential African American leader of the 1800s. He was born a slave in Maryland but managed to escape to the North in 1838. He traveled to Massachusetts and settled in New Bedford, working as a laborer to support himself. In 1841, he attended a convention of the Massachusetts Antislavery Society and quickly came to the attention of its members, eventually becoming a leading figure in the New England antislavery movement...

In 1845, Douglass published his autobiography, "The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: an American Slave." With the revelation that he was an escaped slave, Douglass became fearful of possible re-enslavement and fled to Great Britain and stayed there for two years, giving lectures in support of the antislavery movement in America. With the assistance of English Quakers, Douglass raised enough money to buy his own his freedom and in 1847 he returned to America as a free man.

He settled in Rochester, New York, where he published The North Star, an abolitionist newspaper. He directed the local underground railroad which smuggled escaped slaves into Canada and also worked to end racial segregation in Rochester's public schools.

In 1852, the leading citizens of Rochester asked Douglass to give a speech as part of their Fourth of July celebrations. Douglass accepted their invitation.

In his speech, however, Douglass delivered a scathing attack on the hypocrisy of a nation celebrating freedom and independence with speeches, parades and platitudes, while, within its borders, nearly four million humans were being kept as slaves.

Liberation,
Barbara J. Love

Social Justice Education
SOE, UMASS, Amherst
******************************************

Fellow citizens, pardon me, and allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here today? What have I or those I represent to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice, embodied in that Declaration of Independence, extended to us? And am I, therefore, called upon to bring our humble offering to the national altar, and to confess the benefits, and express devout gratitude for the blessings resulting from your independence to us?

Would to God, both for your sakes and ours, that an affirmative answer could be truthfully returned to these questions. Then would my task be light, and my burden easy and delightful. For who is there so cold that a nation's sympathy could not warm him? Who so obdurate and dead to the claims of gratitude, that would not thankfully acknowledge such priceless benefits? Who so stolid and selfish that would not give his voice to swell the hallelujahs of a nation's jubilee, when the chains of servitude had been torn from his limbs? I am not that man. In a case like that, the dumb might eloquently speak, and the "lame man leap as an hart."

But such is not the state of the case. I say it with a sad sense of disparity between us. I am not included within the pale of this glorious anniversary! Your high independence only reveals the immeasurable distance between us. The blessings in which you this day rejoice are not enjoyed in common. The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity, and independence bequeathed by your fathers is shared by you, not by me. The sunlight that brought life and healing to you has brought stripes and death to me. This Fourth of July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice, I must mourn. To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me, by asking me to speak today? If so, there is a parallel to your conduct. And let me warn you, that it is dangerous to copy the example of a nation (Babylon) whose crimes, towering up to heaven, were thrown down by the breath of the Almighty, burying that nation in irrecoverable ruin.

Fellow citizens, above your national, tumultuous joy, I hear the mournful wail of millions, whose chains, heavy and grievous yesterday, are today rendered more intolerable by the jubilant shouts that reach them. If I do forget, if I do not remember those bleeding children of sorrow this day, "may my right hand forget her cunning, and may my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth!"

To forget them, to pass lightly over their wrongs and to chime in with the popular theme would be treason most scandalous and shocking, and would make me a reproach before God and the world.

My subject, then, fellow citizens, is "American Slavery." I shall see this day and its popular characteristics from the slave's point of view. Standing here, identified with the American bondman, making his wrongs mine, I do not hesitate to declare, with all my soul, that the character and conduct of this nation never looked blacker to me than on this Fourth of July.

Whether we turn to the declarations of the past, or to the professions of the present, the conduct of the nation seems equally hideous and revolting. America is false to the past, false to the present, and solemnly binds herself to be false to the future. Standing with God and the crushed and bleeding slave on this occasion, I will, in the name of humanity, which is outraged, in the name of liberty, which is fettered, in the name of the Constitution and the Bible, which are disregarded and trampled upon, dare to call in question and to denounce, with all the emphasis I can command, everything that serves to perpetuate slavery -- the great sin and shame of America! "I will not equivocate - I will not excuse." I will use the severest language I can command, and yet not one word shall escape me that any man, whose judgment is not blinded by prejudice, or who is not at heart a slave-holder, shall not confess to be right and just.

But I fancy I hear some of my audience say it is just in this circumstance that you and your brother Abolitionists fail to make a favorable impression on the public mind. Would you argue more and denounce less, would you persuade more and rebuke less, your cause would be much more likely to succeed. But, I submit, where all is plain there is nothing to be argued. What point in the anti-slavery creed would you have me argue? On what branch of the subject do the people of this country need light? Must I undertake to prove that the slave is a man? That point is conceded already. Nobody doubts it. The slave-holders themselves acknowledge it in the enactment of laws for their government. They acknowledge it when they punish disobedience on the part of the slave. There are seventy-two crimes in the State of Virginia, which, if committed by a black man (no matter how ignorant he be), subject him to the punishment of death; while only two of these same crimes will subject a white man to like punishment.

What is this but the acknowledgment that the slave is a moral, intellectual, and responsible being? The manhood of the slave is conceded. It is admitted in the fact that Southern statute books are covered with enactments, forbidding, under severe fines and penalties, the teaching of the slave to read and write. When you can point to any such laws in reference to the beasts of the field, then I may consent to argue the manhood of the slave. When the dogs in your streets, when the fowls of the air, when the cattle on your hills, when the fish of the sea, and the reptiles that crawl, shall be unable to distinguish the slave from a brute, then I will argue with you that the slave is a man!

For the present it is enough to affirm the equal manhood of the Negro race. Is it not astonishing that, while we are plowing, planting, and reaping, using all kinds of mechanical tools, erecting houses, constructing bridges, building ships, working in metals of brass, iron, copper, silver, and gold; that while we are reading, writing, and ciphering, acting as clerks, merchants, and secretaries, having among us lawyers, doctors, ministers, poets, authors, editors, orators, and teachers; that we are engaged in all the enterprises common to other men -- digging gold in California, capturing the whale in the Pacific, feeding sheep and cattle on the hillside, living, moving, acting, thinking, planning, living in families as husbands, wives, and children, and above all, confessing and worshipping the Christian God, and looking hopefully for life and immortality beyond the grave -- we are called upon to prove that we are men?

Would you have me argue that man is entitled to liberty? That he is the rightful owner of his own body? You have already declared it. Must I argue the wrongfulness of slavery? Is that a question for republicans? Is it to be settled by the rules of logic and argumentation, as a matter beset with great difficulty, involving a doubtful application of the principle of justice, hard to understand? How should I look today in the presence of Americans, dividing and subdividing a discourse, to show that men have a natural right to freedom, speaking of it relatively and positively, negatively and affirmatively? To do so would be to make myself ridiculous, and to offer an insult to your understanding. There is not a man beneath the canopy of heaven who does not know that slavery is wrong for him.

What! Am I to argue that it is wrong to make men brutes, to rob them of their liberty, to work them without wages, to keep them ignorant of their relations to their fellow men, to beat them with sticks, to flay their flesh with the lash, to load their limbs with irons, to hunt them with dogs, to sell them at auction, to sunder their families, to knock out their teeth, to burn their flesh, to starve them into obedience and submission to their masters? Must I argue that a system thus marked with blood and stained with pollution is wrong? No - I will not. I have better employment for my time and strength than such arguments would imply.

What, then, remains to be argued? Is it that slavery is not divine; that God did not establish it; that our doctors of divinity are mistaken? There is blasphemy in the thought. That which is inhuman cannot be divine. Who can reason on such a proposition? They that can, may - I cannot. The time for such argument is past.

At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed. Oh! had I the ability, and could I reach the nation's ear, I would today pour out a fiery stream of biting ridicule, blasting reproach, withering sarcasm, and stern rebuke. For it is not light that is needed, but fire; it is not the gentle shower, but thunder. We need the storm, the whirlwind, and the earthquake. The feeling of the nation must be quickened; the conscience of the nation must be roused; the propriety of the nation must be startled; the hypocrisy of the nation must be exposed; and its crimes against God and man must be denounced.

What to the American slave is your Fourth of July? I answer, a day that reveals to him more than all other days of the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mock; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are to him mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy - a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation of the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of these United States at this very hour.

Go search where you will, roam through all the monarchies and despotisms of the Old World, travel through South America, search out every abuse and when you have found the last, lay your facts by the side of the everyday practices of this nation, and you will say with me that, for revolting barbarity and shameless hypocrisy, America reigns without a rival.

Frederick Douglass - July 4, 1852 -
Read full post

Elmer Smith On Bernie Madoff's Recent Sentencing

"Additionally, perhaps, part of Madoff’s plea bargain was for the government to leave his wife and kids alone, if they did not want to hear him start singing like a grease monkey in a shower stall."

Dear friends,

If Bernie Madoff conspired with others, in order to pull off a 60 billion dollars Ponzi scheme, then it would seem reasonable, at least to me, that along the way he encountered - if not colluded with - people who were/are either directly linked to our federal government or, at least, in some way connected to it. Would he then also know about other happenings involving the US government’s shady dealings and contractors, for instance? Maybe the powers-that-be just want him to shut up. Additionally, perhaps, part of Madoff’s plea bargain was for the government to leave his wife and kids alone, if they did not want to hear him start singing like a grease monkey in a shower stall.

Nevertheless, as far as I am concerned, the inevitable trillion dollars-plus “Bailout” for big banks and companies makes Madoff’s “take” of 60 billion dollars look like chump change, especially since our government has both the right and threat capacity (police and military) to legitimize printing up as much money as they see fit, at any time. Dig?

In any case, on the link below, you will find an inquiring piece from my very dear friend Elmer Smith who is both a columnist and member of the editorial board of the Philadelphia Daily News. Here, Elm questions Bernie Madoff’s recent sentencing. Check it out!

G. Djata Bumpus


G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/columnists/elmer_smith/49489737.html
Read full post

The scandal called “security vote”

"Nigerian officials have a penchant for taking an otherwise good concept and bastardizing it."
The scandal called “security vote”

By Okey Ndibe

The far from resolved drama of the N250 million cash which police officers reportedly discovered in a convoy of cars belonging to Anambra State points to a peculiarly Nigerian scandal.

The scandal’s name is “security vote.”

Nigerian officials have a penchant for taking an otherwise good concept and bastardizing it.

Take the idea of executive immunity. In the U.S., a serving president or governor is shielded from litigation in his or her personal capacity for all acts and decisions that fall within the legitimate purview of his or her office. Mark that officials are protected from prosecution for acts that are, as a rule, both legitimate in character and consistent with the job specification.

Corrupt enrichment is neither legitimate nor part of the tasks that voters hire a governor or president to discharge. A U.S. governor who dips his or her hands in the public treasury is apt to invite the ire of taxpayers and a visit from agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

Last December, FBI agents stormed the residence of then Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. A handsome, dashing man who briefly dabbled in boxing, Blagojevich was apparently something of a rogue politician. His troubles began after Barack Obama was elected president. It fell to Blagojevich to choose a replacement for the Senate seat the then president-elect had to relinquish.

For the governor, Obama’s seat was a bait to be used in a scheme to rake in cash. According to the FBI, Blagojevich decided to auction the seat to the highest bidder. In numerous taped telephone conversations, he told aides and relatives about his plan to cash in.

Not so fast, said law enforcement agents, who arrested and shackled the governor. They then announced a wide-ranging indictment on federal corruption charges, including solicitation of bribery. On January 29, 2009 the Illinois State Senate voted 59-0 to impeach Blagojevich.

Were Blagojevich a governor in Nigeria, he would still be at his desk today, gloating as if nothing was amiss. The reason is that Nigerian “rulers” enshrined a perverted version of immunity in their constitution. The Nigerian brand of immunity protects a gove rnor even when he betrays his oath of office by committing a crime. Indeed, especially then.

If the Nigerian doctrine of immunity is weird and counterproductive, the idea of security vote is plain wacky – nothing short of a crime in itself.

Each month, Nigerian taxpayers hand billions of naira to the president and state governors in the name of security vote. Each governor receives a few hundred million naira in this slush fund said to be for security purposes.

Bizarre as this “vote” is, what’s even more unbelievable is that each governor is given the absolute prerogative to dispose of the funds as he deems fit, with no oversight whatever.

That kind of license is a recipe for scandal, fraud and abuse. It’s common knowledge that many governors, in the past and now, simply pocket the money. If you dare to ask where the money went, you become – yes – a security threat.

It’s been suggested that the N250 million being ferreted away by Governor Peter Obi’s aides was the monthly security vote. Obi has yet to offer a convincing rebuttal to allegations that, each month, he freighted the security cash to Lagos and “voted” it into his personal account.

To leave so much cash in one man’s unsupervised hands is to encourage unconscionable diversion of public funds in a country where the basic facilities that create a habitable space are lacking. Access to such easy cash explains the desperation and violence with which Nigerian politicians seek political offices.

Who exactly came up with this deranged notion of security vote? The inventor of this scam deserves Nigerians’ collective scorn.

For running the world’s most powerful country, President Obama earns a little more than $400,000. The man doesn’t have one cent of public funds he can spend without answering to the Congress. Why then do Nigerians permit their governors – most of them inept at their job – to cart away the equivalent of $2 million per month, no questions asked?

In America, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has a budget to enable it to carry out its intelligence operations. Owing to the covert nature of its work, the agency does not give a public accounting of how it spends its money. Even so, the agency has accountability obligations, including classified briefings to a select committee of Congress. & nbsp;

Nigerian politicians took from the CIA the idea of concealing how security votes are spent. But they forgot that, in the U.S. and elsewhere, the security funds are handled by agencies with highly trained professionals, not handed out as largesse to politicians seized more by greed than vision.

Nigerians should insist that security vote be expunged – voted out – from their political playbook.
Read full post

What is all of the fuss about the recent Iranian presidential election?

"...Iran is a developing “super-power”, with nuclear energy ambitions that include a space program."

Dear friends,

Just this morning, I was listening to the radio program of a good friend of mine at weibfm.com (smooth jazz), as he mentioned, during a news break, what he and some others in the mass communications media are currently calling the “Iranian Revolution” due to the protestations of young people there who are demanding that their government be more fair about the election process, as well as having a more inclusive public leadership and authority, especially for women. Are any of the young people just mentioned calling for the US government and other Western countries to cease their decades-long economic embargo against the Iranian people? After all, who does the boycott hurt the most – i.e., the privileged bodies (both ecclesiastic and political) or the common folks?

To be sure, if the Western powers mentioned above call off their economic boycott of Iran will that not send a positive message to the people of Iran that the US and others are not trying to meddle in their business, but only mean to provide positive and strong support to the people of Iran? Besides, the history of our own government is covered with blood, especially when talking about African Americans and others fighting for equal rights. As well, in spite of the proclamations of having a “Black” president, African Americans are faring no better, as a whole, than we were prior to President Obama’s election into office.

Moreover, at least to me, the real paradox lies with the fact that African Americans will now be even less likely to protest against governmental injustice, because of the illusion that somehow we have gained power through the election of Barack Obama. Yet, if one thinks about it, while for the past forty years Black mayors have spread across America, all the way from Philly to Alaska, little has changed for most African Americans – or many others peoples, including European Americans (so-called “whites”). How will Barack Obama change that grim reality? More often than not, unfortunately, history has taught us that those who fight against the privileged, once in power, have their own newly-acquired privileges to defend. Dig?

Additionally, as they seem to be having with the elections in Iran, why have neither Western governments nor their media outlets shown any concern with the fairly recent election results in Palestine/Israel that excluded the native people from being part of the electorate and promises to further colonize said Palestinian people (if that is possible) with increased Jewish settlements?

Does all of this media frenzy by the US government- and corporate-controlled media reveal any similarities between Iranians and Americans and how we both conform to whatever our government and the cultural institutions that it endorses - like certain media, churches and schools – as they remind us how to behave/respond to a variety of issues and events? Or do many Americans feel that they have minds of their own, in spite of the ideas that are superimposed upon those minds beginning at a very early age?

Finally, Iran is a developing “super-power”, with nuclear energy ambitions that include a space program. These folks are not “desert jockeys” as racist Western media groups often try to portray the people of Iran and her neighbors. About that, how do the earlier-mentioned young people feel? Worse yet, the more that the US and other Western nations hold on to their nuclear weapons to enhance their “threat” capabilities or muscle, as it were, the more other nations feel that they must both develop and maintain nuclear weapons for their own security and ability to threaten. The end result, at least to me, will be suicidal for all humanity, if we continue to resist genuinely democratic principles and do not stop grandstanding with illusions about “freedom, justice, and equality”. For, ultimately, the quintessence of “democracy” is non-violent conflict resolution. Therefore, the claim of introducing it (said democracy) to Iranians, Iraqis, Palestinians, or anyone else, by violently invading their lands, is a pure lie. Period!

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus

Read full post

A "Different" Fathers’ Day Message – 2009

"It is easy to travel the country and lambaste lower middle class women and men about “doing the right thing”. Let’s face it; they have less access to social attention and power than a celebrity. Yet, the real problem is a lack of community everywhere in this country. Consequently, our social problems have little to do with having more active fathers."

A “Different” Fathers’ Day Message – 2009

A number of male African American celebrities have been making a lot of brouhaha about the need for Black fathers to “step up” and take “responsibility” for guiding young people, especially, our male youth. Yet, the history of humankind has always been one of single mothers of all cultural groups raising their children. The “two-parent” fantasy that was created by Hollyweird’s “Ozzie and Harriet” television program does not reflect either present reality or genuine human history.

Women have always had to carry the burden of children-rearing alone. That is, men of all cultural and social groups, from date-raping celebrity husbands who have paid child support for decades for babies that they had not even fathered, to those who have had sexual affairs right in the White House – from the 18th Century up to modern times, to big-time preachers who have fathered children apart from their original families, it has not been fathers who have done the lion’s share of work in raising the children in human societies. Besides, men have often gone off to war and died, or just died from hard work, or disease, or they have simply abandoned their families for whatever selfish reasons.

Of course, such celebrities as those mentioned above are still considered “good” fathers, because, at least, their children do not normally live in poverty. Moreover, in a possession-oriented society like ours, people look up to those who have the most trinkets and baubles. Therefore, Michael Jackson and O.J. Simpson, along with the fathers of Paris Hilton and Nicole Ritchie serve as great role models for all men. Right.

It is easy to travel the country and lambaste lower middle class women and men about “doing the right thing”. Let’s face it; they have less access to social attention and power than a celebrity does. Yet, the real problem is a lack of community everywhere in this country. Consequently, our social problems have little to do with having more active fathers. As the proverb goes: People who do not practice mutual respect with each other cannot last long as a community. And there must be trust as well. The confidence that is required for expressing either of those two aforementioned attributes (i.e., respect and trust) has absolutely nothing to do with what “gender” one claims to represent.

Additionally, women have carried the human species for millennia. It is just that their jobs in doing so have been made more difficult because of the natural division of labor that is brought into play by childbirth. As a result, unfortunately, in that respect, men, in our insecurities, have used women as a means to an end, just as we have done with each other.

Consequently, at least to me, we must first learn to embrace value judgments that allow us to improve who we “are”, as opposed to what we “have”. Dig? Then we will be more likely to share than hoard. After all, we have enough energy and skills for everyone to have food, clothing, shelter, and medicine.

However, the value judgments just mentioned are not only in relation to our physical prosperity. We must be willing to share in terms of our relatedness to one another. Then people will not have to worry about remaining strangers to each other, by not revealing ourselves completely to others. If that does happens, then, for example, in an erotic relationship, a man and woman will be able to get to know each other, so that they can more adequately show care and concern for - while, simultaneously, feeling responsible to - one another, so that they can, as Jeffrey Osborne sings. “concentrate on” each other.

That is not the way things are now. And with Male Supremacy being bigger than even White Supremacy, women, at the time, have every reason to be hesitant about trusting men. Look what happened to the trust that was given to the male celebrities who were mentioned earlier, by the wives.

One Love,
G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Has Peter Obi Let Nigerians Down?

"Many of us applauded the tenacity with which the man mounted a legal effort to retrieve the mandate the voters of Anambra gave him in 2003, but which was hijacked by the ruling Peoples Democratic Party and its candidate, Chris Ngige, a medical doctor. As an unwavering believer in the principle of credible elections, I took pride in Obi’s decision not to abandon pursuit of an office he’d won."

Is Peter Obi a hypocrite?

by Okey Ndibe

Governor Peter Obi of Anambra is in serious danger of becoming a tragic political figure. According to widely circulated reports, police officers two weeks ago caught men close to the governor with a large cache of cash. As I write, there’s some uncertainty about the sum, but most accounts say N250 million.

Apparently, the cash couriers were stopped as they drove to Obi’s business headquarters in Apapa. Since then, Obi’s office has tried to explain away the scandal. The governor’s aides have, to put it bluntly, done a poor job of it.

They suggested that the cash belonged to a contractor who’s done business with the state government. They have also contended that the cash was far less than newspapers reported. Then, in a needless and unconvincing attempt to muster moral bravado, Obi telegraphed a public letter to the Inspector General of Police demanding a thorough investigation.

Even at the most charitable, one must state that Obi’s explanations, so far, about the source, ownership and purpose of the cash have been nothing short of inconsistent and unimpressive. If anything, the tenor of the Government House’s statements suggests the scrambling incoherence of a man caught doing something indefensible.

In the ten years since Nigeria embarked on this strange phase many pundits call “nascent democracy,” no politician has garnered as much goodwill as Mr. Obi.

Many of us applauded the tenacity with which the man mounted a legal effort to retrieve the mandate the voters of Anambra gave him in 2003, but which was hijacked by the ruling Peoples Democratic Party and its candidate, Chris Ngige, a medical doctor. As an unwavering believer in the principle of credible elections, I took pride in Obi’s decision not to abandon pursuit of an office he’d won.

Once he claimed the office, Obi faced twin nemeses: a state legislature dominated by PDP members, and former President Olusegun Obasanjo, a man whose middle name should be mischief. The former president made no secret of his desire to hand the governorship of Anambra to his ward, Emmanuel Nnamdi (Andy) Uba. Encouraged by Aso Rock, the state legislators impeached Obi in a process that was transparently fraudulent. Again, many Nigerians rooted for him and celebrated when the judiciary restored him to office.

Obi’s come-back achieved dramatic culmination when he persuaded the Supreme Court to find that he had yet to serve out his four-year term as governor, and to oust the impostor, Mr. Uba. His victory triggered a paroxysm of jubilation not only in Anambra but also throughout Nigeria and abroad.

In fact, Obi’s triumph came to symbolize a promising dawn for the judiciary as well as the potential for democratic flowering in a country that continually hovers on the edge of despair.

A man with Obi’s political biography should have governed with a sense of history. He might have surrounded himself with the best talent in every area to enable him to succeed.

Instead, Obi appeared to have misread his political fortune as evidence of his genius. By many accounts, he became impervious to advice, however sound. He began to relish the company of court jesters who fed his ego. He began to court a man with the unsavory antecedents of Chuma Nzeribe, a member of the House of Representatives who’s hardly associated with admirable causes. Instead of delegating duties, he began to function as if he and he alone enjoyed a monopoly of wisdom in the state.

Even before this cash scandal, Obi had disappointed many who expected him to help transform his political party into an institution possessed of gravitas, instead of the ragtag it’s become. Under his watch, doctors went on strike for several months because the governor waved them off instead of engaging them in respectful negotiation. His verbal run-ins with his deputy, Mrs. Virgy Etiaba, as well as Ngige left the impression of a man whose personal limitations have confounded his public office.

It’d be hard to forgive Obi if it turns out that he’s been fiddling with public funds. Anambra needs all the money it can get for the great challenge of development. Awka, the state capital, is in a shameful state, an eyesore. The state’s infrastructure is dismal and requires a lot of cash to fix.

Obi liked to say he was a man of means long before he sought the office of governor. I heard him tell a gathering that if he stole one kobo of Anambra funds, he’d invite God to unleash wrath on him as well as his children.

I hope – for the sake of the long-suffering people of Anambra – that it was not a hypocrite who uttered that sentiment.
Read full post

Smith on the progress of the "Stimulus" Package

"...the only "stimulus" that has been mentioned by the government seems to be about big banks and companies getting billions of dollars of "bailout" money. What is going on?"

Dear friends,

Throughout the recent presidential campaign and all the way up to the inauguration we heard about part of the new administration's "Stimulus Package". Supposedly, it would involve a massive employment projecct for "infrastructural improvement" like repairing roads and fixing old bridges.

Yet, the only "stimulus" that has been mentioned by the government seems to be about big banks and companies getting billions of dollars of "bailout" money. What is going on?

Fortunately, on the link below, the incomparable Elmer Smith of the Philadelphia Daily News provides us with some clarity.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20090609_Elmer_Smith__To_see_stimulus_at_work__follow_the_______if_you_can.html
Read full post

Why we need Single-Payer Health Care

"While President Obama and others say that making our current health system a "single-payer" one would "disrupt" the current process..."

Dear friends,

While President Obama and others say that making our current health system a "single-payer" one would "disrupt" the current process, there is no doubt that single-payer health insurance (which is used by most advanced nations) would be a far better choice than the one that we currently have. Besides, while he has been using that excuse of not wanting to "disrupt" lately, perhaps, our president should consider the fact that the same type of people who protest single-payer health insurance as a disruption, probably thought that having a "Black" president would be one too. Eh?

Nevertheless, on the link below, you will find resources for more information about this crucial issue.

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.ask.com/bar?q=What+is+single-payer+health+insurance%3F&page=1&qsrc=0&ab=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pnhp.org%2Ffacts%2Fsingle_payer_resources.php
Read full post

Taking a measure of Nigeria in London

"Headlined by Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka, the event was organized by the Nigerian Liberty Forum. The NLF, whose public face is Kayode Ogundamisi, exemplifies what can be achieved when committed, mostly young, citizens come together to exclaim no to the diabolical bunch who’re mortgaging their country’s interests."

Taking a measure of Nigeria in London

By Okey Ndibe

Anybody who wished to gauge what Nigerians think about their country’s bizarre brand of “democracy” should have been in London on May 29.

I was there as one of the speakers in a symposium tagged “The State of the Nigerian Nation.” It was clear to me that Nigerians had exhausted their patience with the coterie of criminals who have hijacked their nation, and that something is about to give.

Headlined by Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka, the event was organized by the Nigerian Liberty Forum. The NLF, whose public face is Kayode Ogundamisi, exemplifies what can be achieved when committed, mostly young, citizens come together to exclaim no to the diabolical bunch who’re mortgaging their country’s interests.

Given many Nigerians’ tendency to quickly discount the perfidious acts of their so-called leaders, it’s comforting to behold a group that’s sworn not to forget. Instead, the NLF maintains a formidable sense of the multiple ways in which Nigeria has been betrayed. The group’s goals include advocacy of “good governance, accountability and the enthronement of democracy” and the organization of “peaceful public protests against corrupt Nigerian practices.”

It has recorded some remarkable feats. When Umaru Yar’Adua visited the United Kingdom, the NLF mobilized Nigerians to come out and remind the man’s British hosts about his tainted mandate.

More recently, the group pulled off a successful rally that sent former President Olusegun Obasanjo cowering for cover. Obasanjo had been invited by the London School of Economics to talk about his role as a United Nations’ peace envoy to the Congo. The NLF felt that, given Obasanjo’s record as president, his name and peace should never be mentioned in the same breath.

True, the NLF fell short of persuading LSE to withdraw its invitation. Even so, its members ensured that Obasanjo’s inflated and delusional credential as a peacemaker was eloquently called into question.

In a sense, the symposium was proof that the NLF is far from just reactive. Its lineup of speakers was morally august. There was the former Chair of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Nuhu Ribadu. Soft-spoken in voice and wiry in appearance, Ribadu’s message resonated deeply with the audience. In what amounted to a cry from the heart, he implored Nigerians, one, to reject the false creeds those in power employ to divide and conquer and, two, to reclaim their country from the hands of its despoilers.

There was Femi Falana, one of Nigeria’s most intrepid lawyers, whose insider account of the recent electoral shame in Ekiti reminded the audience about the depth of the ruling party’s determination to emasculate the Nigerian electorate.

The unprepossessing Sowore Omoyele, publisher of saharareporters.com, proved a crowd favorite. Omoyele’s website, which combines hard-edged investigative reports with an iconoclastic style, has endeared him to many Nigerians who relish the way he exposes the cupid underbelly of the ruling class. He challenged Nigeria’s traditional media to awaken to the need to identify with the cause of the masses or risk losing relevance.

Josephine Amuwo, who helps run a highly successful London-based agency that offers training and a variety of other services to women, gave a short but spirited testimony about her passion for Nigeria and her belief in its capacity to rise from the morass and achieve its promise. Affiong L. Affiong, a former student activist, spoke movingly about the role of women in the struggle to liberate Nigeria.

The ever-ebullient Kennedy Emetulu and the energetic Professor Sola Adeyeye gave rousing performances as moderators of the morning and afternoon sessions respectively.

So much was at stake at the London symposium. That it was held on May 29, a day Obasanjo presumptuously declared “Democracy Day,” was at once fortuitous and added to the dramatic temperature.

Soyinka’s speech skewered the notion that May 29, rather than June 12 (when Nigerians held what’s acknowledged as the finest election in their country’s history), merits designation as the day democratic aspirations are to be celebrated.

There was, besides, a running subplot to the symposium that lent it some air of drama. Prior to my arrival in London, I’d received feelers that the Yar’Adua regime was hostile to this gathering of Nigerians to take stock. In London, I was shocked to discover how chagrined Abuja was at the prospect of this meeting. Under pressure from the Nigerian High Commission in London, the London Metropolitan University pulled out as co-sponsors of the event.

When Sowore, Ogundamisi and I sat down in the studios of BEN TV to do a live interview on the conference, the audio became unaccountably mute. I later learned that the High Commission had registered its displeasure with the Nigerian owner of the studio for letting subversive elements appear on his TV. At the symposium, a man told me that the commission had signaled that any Nigerian groups that attended the event courted sharp censure.

Despite these shameful efforts, the hall was packed from morning till the event’s conclusion. Still, the government’s attempt to undermine the symposium struck me as powerful proof that our democracy is yet deformed.
Read full post

Jen Armstrong named Print Journalist of the Year, in Philly

Dear friends,

Like so many others, I was quite excited the other day to see the
announcement in a Philly paper that read: Daily News columnist Jenice Armstrong, a pop culture critic who pokes holes in - and fun at - national, local and celebrity news, was named Print Journalist of the Year in Philadelphia. Armstrong, who also writes a blog, Hey Jen, will be honored by the Philadelphia Association of Black Journalists at the 4th Annual Awards Banquet and Ceremony on June 13, at CBS 3 Studios on Hamilton Street near 15th."

I have been honored to share her work on this blog a number of times. I know many journalists around the world, both male and female. Many have received the highest of recognition, awards-wise. Some may have not received awards that they deserve. Nevertheless, Jen Armstrong stands with the best of them. Moreover, I believe that we have yet to see her full potential (which is a scary thought, in a good way).

Cheers!!! - to Jen and her family

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Jen Armstrong on Queen Michelle (originally posted 4/11/09)

"even with her queen-touching and bicep-baring self, is more popular than her husband, according to the latest Gallup Poll..."





Dear friends,

I know that there are those who complain about the idea that Michelle Obama's fashion flavor obscures the plethora of relevant social issues that deserve more attention. However, on the link below, the person who is, at least to me, America's foremost features columnist, Jenice Armstrong of the Philadelphia Daily News goes a lot deeper into First Lady Michelle Obama's role as an African American woman who both stands for and represents a great deal more than tasteful outfits and social etiquette. Enjoy!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/columnists/jenice_armstrong/20090407_Jenice_Armstrong__Michelle_the_conqueror.html

Read full post

Why do "white" cops kill "Black" cops, but the opposite never happens?

"another African American police officer has been gunned down by his European American counterpart, in New York City..."

Dear friends,

In the wake of "A Black guy did it!" claims still swirling around the country, another African American police officer has been gunned down by his European American counterpart, in New York City. On the link below is a comprehensive look at both of these issues by formidable journalist Errol Louis of the New York Daily News.

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/05/30/2009-05-30_its_never_black_cop_shoots_a_white_cop.html
Read full post

A Nigerian Rawlings to the rescue?‏

"Many Nigerians believe that, unless a man with Rawlings’ stomach for dealing ruthlessly with the enemies of progress comes to the rescue, Nigeria is bound to stay its dismal course..."

A Nigerian Rawlings to the rescue?

by Okey Ndibe

Nigerians have a Jerry Rawlings fantasy. By the day, a growing number of them suggest that the answer to their country’s malaise is to have a homegrown Rawlings emerge.

Many Nigerians believe that, unless a man with Rawlings’ stomach for dealing ruthlessly with the enemies of progress comes to the rescue, Nigeria is bound to stay its dismal course.

For Ghanaians, Rawlings is a contentious, even divisive, figure. In my conversations with numerous Ghanaian acquaintances, I take away the impression that as many of them despise the man as admire him.

There’s hardly any such ambivalence among Nigerians. For us, Rawlings has heroic allure. Many Nigerians contend that it’d take somebody of Rawlings’ willingness to shoot a few bad men for Nigerian knaves masquerading as leaders to sit up.

I’m not altogether persuaded that a Rawlings-like bloodbath is the elixir Nigeria needs. There can be no shortcuts to the ingrained pathology of Nigeria, a country that, in the sage words of Chinua Achebe, always invents a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Even so, I don’t blame those who wish – indeed, pray – for a Rawlings to descend in our midst and hold our traitorous men and women to account.

I believe part of the reason corruption thrives in Nigeria on a grave scale is that no Nigerian of political consequence has ever been made to pay for betraying the public trust.

Impoverished Nigerians desperate for the next meal get lynched everyday for picking somebody’s pocket. I’m certain that Nigerian jails teem with prisoners who have languished for years simply for stealing a goat, a tuber of yam, or a bale of textile. Many wretched Nigerians are locked up daily merely because they happened to be in the wrong place when corrupt police officers chose to make their sweeps.

By contrast, what’s the harshest sanction ever meted out to any governor or head of state for stealing millions of dollars from the treasury? How many judges have paid a stiff price for selling judgment to the highest bidder? Has any lawmaker been sentenced for pocketing constituency allowances?

At the end of 1983, Muhammadu Buhari led a coup d’etat that swept a class of corrupt politicians from power. Many of the rusticated politicians were locked up for months and stripped of their ill-gotten assets. That was until General Ibrahim Babangida showed up and displaced Buhari. One of Babangida’s first orders of business was to quickly release the detained politicians. Each freed detainee was “ordered” to refund some sum of money. Several years later, a confidante of a released former governor told me that the ex-detainee never paid a kobo in restitution. The refund orders, he said, were meant simply to lull the public into a false sense that those who fleeced the public coffers had been divested of their loot.

Far from paying, many of the deposed politicians were soon awarded cabinet posts as well as board appointments by the selfsame Babangida. Their stealing orgy continued – with hardly any interruption.

The late General Sani Abacha borrowed from Babangida’s script. He surrounded himself with some of the most unconscionable robbers of the public till. Inspired and motivated by Abacha’s own depraved expertise in thievery, these men and women pocketed their nation’s resources with impunity.

Check the records and these looters and embezzlers, who should be incarcerated for life, dominate the rolls of national honor laureates.

All too rarely, an isolated good man or woman breaches the barricades and ascends public office in Nigeria. But, as a general principle, criminals run the Nigerian public space. And these criminals go to any length to protect their “right” to continue the privatization of public funds.

Olusegun Obasanjo ruled Nigeria as if it were his private fiefdom. For much of his watch, Nigerians got little or no accountability about the management of their oil sector. He permitted his aides to stash away cash in presidential jets during overseas visits. Tafa Balogun, the man Obasanjo handpicked as Inspector General of Police, spent less than six months in jail for stealing a whooping N17 billion. Other presidential chums did not as much as get a slap on the wrist for their grubbing activities.

Now, Nigeria is in the unsteady hands of Mr. Umaru Yar’Adua. Yar’Adua’s specialty is to use committees to postpone, if not shirk, the task of tackling corruption. He is a man in whom Nigeria’s league of former and incumbent corrupt officials are extremely well pleased. His talk-tough, do-nothing style has become manure for those in the business of pocketing public funds.

Those who feed fat on Nigeria’s crude are applauding the military bombardment of the Niger Delta in the name of combating militants. Yet, it’s their gluttony that produced the militancy in the first place. Are they capable of checking their greed, or would it take a Rawlings to strike fear in these vampires?
Read full post

Video feature with Glen Loury on Obama (originally posted 11/21/08)

That term, "underclass", I contended was an impossible description of people who lived in a class society. In other words, to be "under" a class, as it were, is to suggest that one is living in a society that has no classes. Moreover, the term contradicts itself, since, in our society, everyone belongs to some economic class. Eventually, after a brief debate, Glen agreed with me

************************************
Dear friends,

Back in 1995, while writing a book review for the now-defunct, but highly worthy magazine, African Commentary, I interviewed Glen Loury. At the time, after an unfortunate occurrence in his personal life, Professor Loury stopped teaching at Harvard University and went across the Charles River to Boston University, another great school.

In any case, during the interview, we segued from the topic of the book that I was reviewing, for a moment, because I wanted to discuss a term that he had popularized during the Reagan Era which was commonly bandied about by journalists and other such pundits. That term, "underclass", I contended was an impossible description of people who lived in a class society. In other words, to be "under" a class, as it were, is to suggest that one is living in a society that has no classes. Moreover, the term contradicts itself, since, in our society, everyone belongs to some economic class. Eventually, after brief discourse, Glen agreed with me.

I found that more than noble of him. After all, the level of plagiarism and other kinds of dishonesty has become such a part of American academia, even among African American scholars now, that I was pleasantly astonished. It is for that reason that when I saw the brief video on the link below, from the New York Times, I had to share it. Enjoy!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://video.nytimes.com/video/2008/11/14/opinion/1194832958030/bloggingheads-is-real-change-here.html
Read full post

Dr. Julianne Malveaux on a variety of issues.(originally posted March 29, 2009)

"
"Despite the prominence of Oprah Winfrey, the profound wisdom of poet Maya Angelou, the gentle grace of businesswoman Susan Taylor and the small, but powerful influence ofAfrican-American women in an array of occupations, we are virtually invisible in the policy context and demeaned and distorted in popular culture..."




Dear friends,

Dr. Julianne Malveaux is a distinguished scholar and college administrator who never seems to shy away from providing thought-provoking analysis and biting critique, regarding any number of social issues. Moreover, at least to me, she reminds, especially many men, that what women see as in their best interests are not always what men seem to think those interests are or should be.

On the link below, is a page from her Website that shows a host of recent columns by Dr. Malveaux. Enjoy.

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.juliannemalveaux.com/latest_columns.html
Read full post

"Women and minorities" (originally posted 8/24/08)

"The writings and speeches of both Matilda and Maria precede other "feminist" pioneers like the Grimke Sisters, by several years..."

Dear friends,

With of the talk about"women" by Hillary Clinton herself, and others like her, where the humanity of African American women is downright ignored, by the former using the phrase "women and minorities", it is, perhaps, instructive that we recall the fact that African American women have been at the forefromt of all womanist movements in this country, historically...

For example, if we look at a child who is born in 2008, and go back roughly eight generations, or 190 years (that's about the time that the grandmother of the grandmother of the aforementioned child's grandmother's grandmother lived), we can appreciate the fact that, during that period, a woman named Matilda wrote to the "Freedom's Journal", an African American newspaper of that day, "Messrs. Editors...Will you allow a female to offer a few remarks upon a subject that you must allow to be all important? I don't know that in any of your papers, you have said sufficient upon the education of females. I hope you are not to be classed with those, who think that our mathematical knowledge should be limited to 'fathoming the dish-kettle,' and that We have acquired enough of history, if we know that our grandfather's father lived and died...I would address myself to all mothers- it is their bounden duty to store their daughters' minds with useful learning. They should be made to devote their leisure time to reading books, whence they would derive information, which could never betaken from them." ( A Documentary History of the Negro People in the U. S., edited by Herbert Aptheker)

Matilda's letter was published four years prior to any known work by Maria Stewart, the African American woman from Massachusetts who has been called the first American-born woman to speak in public. The writings and speeches of both Matilda and Maria precede other "feminist" pioneers like the Grimke Sisters, by several years. As a matter of fact, about Mrs. Stewart's speeches, Philip Foner quoted Eleanor Flexner as saying that they heralded the arguments the Grimkes were to use a few years later. (see The Voice of Black America, Vol.1, edited by Foner)

Hardly ever mentioned, if not avoided altogether, in discussions concerning the African American experience are the historic roles of African American women in preserving the heritage of African American people, in the midst of a "double jeopardy", that is, being both African American AND a woman. (see essay by Francis Beale called"Double Jeopardy: To Be Black and Female", from the anthology entitled The Black Woman, edited by Toni Cade).

Hillary Clinton and her supporters do not have that problem (i.e., double jeopardy). Unfortunately, instead, she and her fellow"women" perpetuate racism, while, simultaneously, doing harm to others. That is able to happen, because, in a socially-stratified society such as ours, one can belong to an oppressed group, yet, also be part of an oppressor group, at the same time. The Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill trial proved that adequately. In other words, Thomas was "oppressed" as a Black , but an "oppressor" as a man.

Consequently, while Hillary and many of her supporters are "oppressed" as women, they are "oppressors" as "white" people. Again, the Black woman has no such duality in her identity. That is why it is completely inane for European American (so-called white) journalists to call Michelle Obama "unpatriotic" when she proclaimed to be proud of this country "for the first time" in her life, regarding her husband's success in campaigning for his nomination as the official candidate for the Democratic party. After all, was Michelle Obama supposed to be proud, heretofore, of a country that enslaved her ancestors by law, and whose law enforcement agents and many of her other fellow citizens continue to, randomly, inflict injury, for purely "racial" reasons, upon African American people?

Let's keep it real!

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

More scamming and stealing by the Nigerian government and their "friends"

"Asked to appear and tell his side of the sordid affair, Obasanjo quibbled about the lowly station of the man who signed his letter of invitation. He then told the committee he was too “indisposed” to appear in person. Instead, he sent a long epistle filled with rambling lectures on etiquette and obfuscations where clear answers were needed about the huge payments he authorized for questionable or non-existent work."

<Hunting the hunter

By Okey Ndibe

Nigerians ought to pay attention to two recent, and clearly linked, events. The two events illustrate how the cabal that runs – which is to say, ruins – Nigeria goes about protecting its own and preserving its right to eat Nigerians for lunch.

First, there’s the EFCC’s arrest and arraignment of Ndudi Elumelu, chair of the House of Representatives committee on power. Mr. Elumelu is accused of participating in a N5.2 billion rural electrification scam. The second is the effort to discredit the work of Elumelu’s probe panel.
Elumelu’s trial is a politically significant development. Last year, his committee had probed Nigeria’s multi-billion dollar investment in power projects that seem to have disappeared, puff, into air.

Umaru Musa Yar’Adua first alerted Nigerians to the scandal. He said his predecessor had spent $10 billion on power with nothing to show for it. Shortly after, Speaker Dimeji Bankole asserted that as much as $16 billion may have been wasted in the name of power projects.

Elumelu and his committee got cracking. Revelation after astounding revelation emerged at their televised hearings. In case after case, witnesses testified that contractors who had not as much as scratched a grain of sand had walked away with as much as 80 percent of contract sums. In most, if not all, cases, the government had violated its own due process rules.

What emerged from the hearings was an unseemly picture of political office holders betraying the public trust. Judging by the hearings, the committee’s report was expected to make explosive findings. It did, indicting both former President Olusegun Obasanjo and his clique of cabinet operatives, including Liyel Imoke (now a governor) and Olusegun Agagu (a rusticated governor).

Asked to appear and tell his side of the sordid affair, Obasanjo quibbled about the lowly station of the man who signed his letter of invitation. He then told the committee he was too “indisposed” to appear in person. Instead, he sent a long epistle filled with rambling lectures on etiquette and obfuscations where clear answers were needed about the huge payments he authorized for questionable or non-existent work.

Imoke appeared before the committee, but his performance was no better than his former boss’s. He arrived with a cheerleading squad in tow. Then he basically told the committee that Nigerians had no right to expect improved power supply before they have pumped cash on the scale of South Africa’s investment in the power sector. Agagu? Well, he could hardly remember a thing he did as power minister.

You’d think that the Elumelu report would inform Nigerians about the way their scarce resources were squandered. From the outset, it was clear that powerful interests were out to torpedo the report. The speaker, once an enthusiast, threw so many roadblocks in the way of the report that it took months before the committee had an opportunity to tell Nigerians what they’d found. Some murmured that the committee had pocketed a huge bribe. An exasperated Elumelu abandoned parliamentary reserve to warn Nigerians that those who misappropriated funds were out to fudge up the picture.

When it came time to present his report, the occasion turned into farce. Numerous members of the committee disowned the report, accused Elumelu of running a witch-hunt, and even sang the praises of the men who’d signed off billions of dollars of public funds to contractors who did next to nothing.

In the end, the House asked another committee, headed by deputy whip Aminu Tambuwal, to take a look at Elumelu’s work.

Last week, Tambuwal’s committee dismissed Elumelu’s report. In a verdict inflected with the misruling cabal’s ability to lie with a straight face, the ad-hoc committee claimed that Nigeria “did not lose any money in the award of power projects executed by the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo between 1999 and 2007.”

With Obasanjo, Imoke and Agagu thus canonized, Nigerians ought to wonder whether Elumelu’s trial is a case of teaching a whistle blower a lesson.

If Elumelu played hanky panky with funds meant for rural electrification, by all means nail him. But the leadership of the House must think Nigerians brain dead if they expect us to swallow the concoction that Obasanjo’s power projects were beyond reproach.

The test of the truth lies in Nigerian light switches. If the $10 billion (or $13 billion or $16 billion) Obasanjo threw into power projects were well invested, then Nigerians would find a commensurate measure of improvement in their power supply. Alas, that’s not the case.

The Coalition Against Corrupt leaders (CACOL) is right to question how Tambuwal’s “subterranean committee” could “discredit the report of a probe procedure that the same House carried out in the full glare of the whole world through live transmission on global television channels.”
Read full post

Another brief interview/discussion with Neil Zagorin about recent developments in Palestine/Israel

"Neil: The Israeli body politic is complicated. Leaving aside what the approximately 25% of Israeli citizens who aren’t Jewish think about Palestinian independence, there is a spread of opinion among Israeli Jews about Palestinian independence."

Djata: Neil, recently, I saw a news clip that featured the mayor of Hebron boasting about how he and his constituents are looking forward to expanding Jewish settlements, especially due to the return of Benjamin Netanyahu as the Prime Minister of Israel. Is this an anti-peace position that that mayor is taking?

Neil: A two-state solution in which Palestine becomes independent in the West Bank and Gaza, and Israel withdraws to its 1949-1967 borders has been discussed and negotiated for the past 15 years or so. It’s not the same thing as peace, but it’s a political resolution that might make peace possible someday – or that’s the hope. The two-state solution assumes that Jewish communities built in the West Bank since the Six-Day War of 1967 will be dismantled to make an independent Palestine possible. Expanding Jewish settlement in the West Bank complicates the process of removing Jewish communities from the West Bank. This in turn complicates the prospect of some type of two-state solution.

Djata: Does it seem that, at least, some political Zionists do not recognize the right of Palestinians to exist as a free and autonomous people within the present geographical domain of Palestine/Israel?

Neil: The Israeli body politic is complicated. Leaving aside what the approximately 25% of Israeli citizens who aren’t Jewish think about Palestinian independence, there is a spread of opinion among Israeli Jews about Palestinian independence. There’s a small group of Israeli Jews who believe that Palestinian independence is the right thing to support no matter the risks involved. There’s a much larger group, possibly a majority, who would support Palestinian independence if they felt it brought them security and peace. At this point many of these Israeli Jews are despairing that Palestinian independence would bring Israel security and peace. There are some other Israeli Jews who favor or would support Palestinian independence, but view this as a settlement to be unilaterally imposed by Israel. Avigdor Lieberman, the new Foreign Minister, exemplifies this. His platform calls for Israel to annex the large Jewish settlement blocs in the West Bank, while insisting that a number of Arab-majority areas of Israel adjacent to the West Bank leave Israel to become part of some type of Palestinian state.

Then there are groups of Israeli Jews who have a vision of Israel as a Jewish nation-state stretching from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River. Such visions may be based on political nationalism (many early Zionists held this view,) a fundamentalist reading of the bible (God gave all the Land of Israel to the Jews,) or some combination of the two. So, yes, there are Israeli Jews who oppose any kind of Palestinian political independence between the Mediterranean and the Jordan. Political parties informed by these beliefs predominate in the new Israeli government. Their current electoral strength stems partly from the fact that many Israeli Jews who formerly were willing to negotiate for Palestinians independence and Israeli security now despair of that option, and support political parties that take a hard-line stance on maintaining Israeli control of the West Bank.
Read full post

Some of Nigeria's children are involved in a holocaust (originally posted 11/21/08)

Ndibe reveals a horrifying predicament that has a certain body of Nigerian chldren caught up in a maelstrom...

Because of last night's airing (May 22, 2009) on ABC's Nightly News and Nightline programs regarding this issue, I have decided tp repost this story.

G, Djata Bumpus


****************************************
Dear friends,

Unfortunately, the illusions that far too many humans embrace have caused more suffering than any illness or disease has.

On the link below is a report from noted Nigerian author, educator, and scholar Okey Ndibe, regarding the horrific acts by certain adults, including parents, against children in parts of Nigeria have created a genuine holocaust among the latter.

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/articles/okey-ndibe/nigeria-s-savaged-children-2.html
Read full post

HAPPY 60th BIRTHDAY!!! to Stephen Manuel Bumpus

From the entire family. Read full post

Smith on Convenience and Rights

"Until we can contribute as much to their campaigns as the NRA does, a lot of these lawmakers will be more beholden to the gun lobby than to us. *


My old and dear friend Elmer Smith of the Philadelphia Daily News, in his usual biting but humorous analysis, reminds us of how significant our votes are. Keep the faith! - but carry...

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20090515_Elmer_Smith__Pack_a_rod_in_Independence_Hall__Your_senators_and_the_NRA_get_the_credit.html
Read full post

Should rich people pay more taxes?

Why are poor people complaining about the rich having to pay more taxes?

Dear friends,

Recently, while rappin' with one of my brothers about thie whole issue of income tax rates in our country, he quipped, "They have poor people complaining about the fact that the rich are gonna be taxed more." Go figure.

Moreover, the rich have far more to defend in this possession-oriented, market-driven economy. Therefrore, they should hardly be complaining. After all, as I have pointed out in a previous post, Adam Smith, the "Father of Economics", in his classic volumes called "The Wealth of Nations" summed up the entire notion of how our system works, when he said: For every rich man there are 500 poor ones, and he would not get a night's sleep if it weren't for the local magistrate.

At any rate, the article on the link below was written by an extremely competent and progressive journalist who is also on the editorial staff of a great weekly called The Valley Advocate here in Western Massachusetts. Check it out!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.valleyadvocate.com/article.cfm?aid=9708
Read full post

27 betrayed Nigerian soldiers

"Nigerian soldiers, like most of the country’s workforce, are poorly paid. In contrast, many military officers earn handsome packages..."

27 betrayed soldiers

By Okey Ndibe

On April 27, the Nigerian state committed a grievous act of betrayal of 27 brave soldiers who simply stood up to demand their right.

That day, a military tribunal condemned the soldiers – among them, three women – to spend the rest of their lives in jail. It is nothing short of a scandalous miscarriage of justice that the court found the soldiers guilty of mutiny.

The scandal lies in the details of the case. The soldiers’ so-called crime was to protest the non-payment of allowances that accrued to them from their participation in United Nations peacekeeping operations in Liberia. Each of the protesting soldiers had earned as much as $25,000. Yet, long after the UN had remitted the funds, some corrupt military officers sat on the funds.

After months of seeking payment, the exasperated soldiers staged a mild protest in Akure, Ondo State. No doubt, they sought to draw attention to their plight – and to shame the military authorities into releasing their overdue entitlements.

Instead of doing the right thing by these long-suffering soldiers, the military brass ordered their arrest and prosecution. Their lawyer, Femi Falana, has said that they were detained for several months under abominable conditions. And then the tribunal compounded this bizarre injustice by herding these innocents off to life imprisonment.

This is one more instance – and a particularly unforgivable one – of a highly criminalized state presuming to be the custodian of law and order.

Let’s be clear: mutiny is a grave matter, with a potential for undermining the security of a state. But the convicted soldiers, properly understood, are not mutineers so much as they are victims of a state that rewards real criminals.

Nobody has denied that some corrupt officers illicitly withheld the soldiers’ stipends. In fact, in January the same tribunal had convicted five officers of stealing $68,000 belonging to the hapless soldiers. And what kind of punishment did the quick-fingered officers receive? Mere demotion. Not one of them lost his job. Not one was slammed with a life sentence.

Yet, the twenty-seven soldiers they disinherited and drove to the edge of desperation are found fit to languish in jail unto death. Falana has described the life sentences as “a charade that cannot stand.” Charade is too mild a word.

Nigerian students, labor groups, academics and other professional organizations ought to rise and protest the cruelty to these poor soldiers who’ve been betrayed by their officers, and are in danger of being made living corpses for asking to be paid what they had more than earned.

Nigerian soldiers, like most of the country’s workforce, are poorly paid. In contrast, many military officers earn handsome packages. Besides, many officers enjoy one form or other of patronage from politicians. There’s neither rhyme nor reason, then, for an officer to steal a soldier’s allowance.

Yet, for years Nigerian soldiers drafted to peacekeeping tasks whispered woeful stories of officers who took huge slices of their payments, or even engaged in wholesale embezzlement.

Despite the appellation of “peacekeeping,” it’s no secret that these operations are highly hazardous. Soldiers whose job is to keep the peace are often shot at. Sometimes, they are sitting ducks, targeted by the armed groups they try to keep from armed engagement. Many Nigerian soldiers have lost their lives in such peacekeeping assignments as Liberia, Sierra Leone, and the Congo. Many more have been maimed, condemned to carry for life scars that are grotesque reminders of the sacrifices they made to hold hell at bay for besieged civilian populations in such addresses as Bosnia, Rwanda and Liberia.

The least a nation owes these men and women who risk life and limbs is to ensure that they are paid their due at the completion of their assignments. In the lawless space that’s Nigeria, where greed is boundless, this simple expectation is often too much to ask.

What are soldiers to do when a few of their rogue officers decide to pocket their peacekeeping allowances? Crawl into their barrack cocoons and become mute victims? Fall to their knees, raise hands to heaven, and leave the case in God’s hands? Should they pen petitions to politicians in Abuja who all too often are too busy chasing after lucre to pause and listen to anybody’s entreaties?

This is a portrait of the predicament these soldiers had to deal with. They were aware of past instances when grubby officers made away with soldiers’ peacekeeping allowances. They knew that Nigeria is a space where crime pays, provided the criminal has the preferment of rank or access to the powers-that-be.

They made a decision – absolutely sensible in the circumstances – to dramatize their woes. They deserve apologies from the officers who stole from them. Should these men and women be made to spend even a day in jail, the Nigerian state would have made another investment in its demise.
Read full post

Was George Carlin Right?

"By the way, George Carlin, a contemporary of Richard Pryor, at least to me, was often as insightful and funny as the beloved Pryor..."

Dear friends,

I read this piece on the blog of a buddy of mine and thought that I would share it. It reminds us of the reality with which we are all familiar, regarding our nation's constant economic predicament.

By the way, George Carlin, a contemporary of Richard Pryor, at least to me, was often as insightful and funny as the beloved Pryor.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.lewrockwell.com/cooper/cooper8.html
Read full post

Proclamations of Electoral Reform in Nigeria

"A president worthy of the name would have recognized the grave danger of Bankole’s perverse speech. He would have immediately stepped forward, asked for the microphone, and publicly rebuked the speaker for telling the world that the PDP’s idea of an election was to stage a coup d’etat against the wishes of the electorate..."

Ekiti and rumors of electoral reform

by Okey Ndibe


A few weeks ago – April 10, to be exact – I wrote on this page that the then forthcoming electoral debacle in Ekiti State foretold the sham that will take the place of the general elections of 2011. In the opening paragraph of a column titled “Ekiti as a preview of 2011,” I warned: “Those who persist in seeing Umaru Musa Yar'Adua as a democrat at heart had better pay attention to the macabre show the man took to Ekiti State.” Yar’Adua, I continued, “comes across as a man who wants power at all cost and for its own sake.”

I wrote those words in the context of Yar’Adua’s bizarre campaign stump in the hotly contested state. First, the resident of Aso Rock manufactured alleged achievements for Mr. Segun Oni, the party’s governorship candidate and impostor who was justly removed by an appellate court. Then he stood by, a confounded and tragic figure, as Speaker Dimeji Bankole tried to galvanize a smattering of party faithful with a fully treasonous campaign speech.

Dimeji told his audience that the PDP had pocketed Ekiti in the elections of April 2007 with the use of police power. A speaker who habitually misspeaks, Bankole then reminded his listeners that their (ruling) party boasts the “commander-in-chief” of the Nigerian Armed Forces. Not one to settle for a coded message, Bankole was not shy to spell out what he meant. This time around, he assured, the party would deploy the intimidating force of the military to capture Ekiti.

A president worthy of the name would have recognized the grave danger of Bankole’s perverse speech. He would have immediately stepped forward, asked for the microphone, and publicly rebuked the speaker for telling the world that the PDP’s idea of an election was to stage a coup d’etat against the wishes of the electorate. Yar’Adua glumly listened to statements that amounted to a threat to subvert democratic ideals.

If Bankole’s martial rhetoric was disturbing, things got even more ludicrous before the April 25 date of the rerun polls. Next and a few Nigerian websites posted the taped voice of Governor Olagunsoye Oyinlola of Osun State doing his treasonous best to rally PDP partisans. Oyinlola, a former military officer, is heard rehearsing an armed strategy to intimidate and suppress opposition sympathizers. He pledges to equip PDP operatives with military uniforms and weapons to enable them to “capture” Ekiti.

In a country where the rule of law is more than a cynical fad, Oyinlola’s taped plan to sabotage democracy would have elicited universal condemnation. The man would have been flushed out of his gubernatorial seat and led away in handcuffs, a disgraced figure.

Not in Yar’Adua’s Nigeria. Oyinlola remains in the office he has tainted by his odoriferous speech, among other unbecoming acts.

It’s painful to gloat that one’s dire prediction about Ekiti and 2011 is being vindicated. Yet, when a character like former President Olusegun Obasanjo takes to mocking the man he imposed as Nigeria’s sleeper-in-chief, Nigerians had better take notice. It’s a sign that things are truly bleak.

Reporters recently asked Obasanjo to weigh in on Umaru Yar’Adua’s avowed reform of Nigeria’s electoral laws. The former president blithely retorted that he wasn’t aware that any polling reforms were in the offing.

In its terseness and wicked indirection, the response was typical Obasanjo. Of course, the former president is smarting from a sharp decline in his fortunes within the ruling party. At a recent gathering in Abuja that it styled a convention, the ruling party pretty much whittled down Obasanjo’s powers.

It was only three years ago that the PDP tagged Obasanjo “father of modern Nigeria.” The same party seems on a mission to deflate the expired emperor’s ego. Its convention stripped Obasanjo of his dream to hold a monopoly on the chairmanship of the party’s board of trustees unto death.

Increasingly vilified, even ostracized, by many of the men and women he smuggled into power at various levels, Obasanjo’s legendary vindictiveness appears aroused. His revenge? To tell the truth – at least on occasion – about the bunch he hoisted into illegitimate power.

Some tell the truth as a way to set themselves, and others, free. Not Obasanjo. For him, it seems, the motivation for speaking truth is merely to get even. However untoward his motivation, what matters is that we now have Obasanjo’s confession that Yar’Adua’s vaunted electoral reform is a yarn, another jiggery pokery.

Nobody who’s watched the sordid events in Ekiti can retain confidence in Yar’Adua, the PDP or the national electoral commission to husband democratic ideals. Even as the drama in Ekiti fostered fears of a military putsch, the PDP hunkered down, determined to snatch the state by unfair and foul means. Maurice Iwu, a man with neither an ounce of integrity nor sense of shame, worked feverishly behind the scenes to gratify the ruling party’s plot. What was this “independent electoral umpire” doing at a meeting that featured such PDP stalwarts as Yar’Adua, Bankole Dimeji and David Mark, but with not a single participant from the opposing AC?

Ekiti was Yar’Adua’s opportunity to silence skeptics by demonstrating his seriousness about ethical and electoral reforms. Alas, the man (and his party as well as INEC) chose to reveal the fake product they’ve been marketing as electoral reforms.
Read full post

Why did the Obama administration boycott the Durban Review Conference on Racism?

“As we feared the Administration’s decision to boycott the Durban Review has sent shock waves around the globe,” said Nicole Lee, Executive Director of TransAfrica Forum. “To date eight countries have announced they are pulling out of the Durban process, many based on the US decision.”

Dear friends,

"Shocking!!!" is an understatement! President Obama's administration chose to boycott the Durban Review of the World Conference on Racism. If you recall, less than two weeks after the United States and Israel pulled out of the aforementioned conference in 2001, a series of airplane attacks occurred - now known as 9/11.

While these attacks may have happened anyway, it seems, at least to me, that the catalyst was the abandonment of the World Conference on Racism about which I have just spoken. Will the latest move bring another attack? Who knows? One thing is for sure: The direction that the current administration is taking betrays all of the campaign rhetoric that caused so many people to support Barack Obama. What will happen next? On the link below, perhaps, we can now understand why Dr. King insisted "Why We Can't Wait".

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://transafricaforum.org/media-center/news-releases/taf-disappointed-obama-admin-failure-attend-durban-review
Read full post

A South African analyzes Apartheid versus Zionism (originally posted 8/30/08)

"Of course, invading a country under false pretense is not a form of terrorism to the victims. Is it? They are glad to see their liberators. Right?"

Dear friends,

The link below features an article from a great resource spot that you may want to check out from time-to-time. The producers of the Website focus on Africa. Particularly, in the case of Africa, little attention is given by Western journalists, outside of tragedies. As well, since 9/11, particularly the Israelis and their allies in the United States, via the mass communications media, have been able to somehow put fighters of the the Palestinian Liberation Movement in the same context as the Al Quaeda "terrorists". Neat trick. Eh?

Of course, invading a country under false pretense is not a form of terrorism to the victims. Is it? They are glad to see their liberators. Right? If they are not, then like the former mayor of Baghdad, shortly after the US-led invasion of Iraq, they will be locked up, if they are not happy to have their land invaded, their army disbanded, their government dismissed, and their civil rights taken.

One Love,
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/49608
Read full post

Defying Justice in Nigeria

"Many Nigerians already suspect that their judiciary teems with too many men and women with a profound deficit of shame and integrity..."

Andy Uba and an indulgent Supreme Court

by Okey Ndibe

Hand it to Andy Uba, a domestic aide to former President Olusegun Obasanjo: the man has a certain viral persistence, a refusal to take no for an answer.

On June 14, 2007, the Supreme Court removed Uba from his ill-gotten perch as governor of Anambra. In a ruling that drew nation-wide cheer, the court roundly rebuked the electoral commission for conducting gubernatorial elections in Anambra when the tenure of incumbent Governor Peter Obi had not ended.

Allergic to being told no, Uba hired a new set of lawyers and approached the same court. He asked a seven-member panel of the nation’s high court to recant its earlier judgment and return him as governor in Awka. In another unanimous verdict, the justices told him, hell no.

Emerging from the court, Uba’s lawyers vowed that the last had not been heard. They soon made good on this improbable boast by asking a court of appeal to find that Uba’s so-called mandate was secured in a legitimate election. In one of the bizarre twists in the country’s recent judicial history, the appellate justices gave a muddled judgment that Uba’s camp then held aloft as proof that their man was “a governor-in-waiting.” In the face of fierce legal criticism, the panel that allegedly gave that verdict beat an untidy retreat.

Even so, Uba was far from done. Late last year, he set out on another adventure to the Supreme Court. His singular wish list is for a court that twice turned him back to contrive some legal contortions to impose him as governor of Anambra.

In entertaining this case at all, the Supreme Court is in danger of leaving its reputation in tatters. Mr. Uba seems to have served notice that he plans to harangue the court until he gets an indulgent panel willing to do his bidding.

Many Nigerians already suspect that their judiciary teems with too many men and women with a profound deficit of shame and integrity. The nation’s highest court cannot afford to leave the impression that its hallowed chambers are permanently open to the fancies of any client with a huge treasury of inexplicable wealth.

It’s doubtful that Mr. Uba’s persistent wheedling has anything to do with respect for the rule of law. He comes across, instead, as a cynical man determined to make relays to the high court until he’s handed a panel of sympathetic justices. It’s an ill-disguised belief in the rule of money.

Mr. Uba’s judicial round-tripping should trouble any Nigerian who wishes to see the enthronement of a fiercely independent judiciary, at once incorruptible and committed to the highest ideals of judicial ethics.

Of course, whenever justice is transparently miscarried, it’s the duty of a court to redress it. But in the case of Uba, it is hard to picture how he’s been ill served by the apex court. Uba’s latest judicial adventure has everything to do with political calculations. One of the closest confidantes of Obasanjo, Uba was eased into place as the PDP’s governorship candidate. He was subsequently declared “winner” of a gubernatorial contest that Human Rights Watch categorized as illustrative of electoral fraud. Here’s how ludicrous Uba’s so-called election was: the electoral commission initially awarded him more votes than there were registered voters in the state.

When the Supreme Court removed Uba on June 14, 2007 – a mere two weeks after he usurped office – their decision elicited widespread celebration. A man rang me from Kaduna to say that it was not just a victory for the people of Anambra but a triumph for all Nigerians.

There was good reason for the celebratory air. Uba epitomizes the worst tendencies in many Nigerians who occupy elective or appointive office. A man who has not been able to authenticate that he earned a first academic degree, Uba’s campaign website misled people with the information that he holds a PhD. When The News, a Nigerian weekly magazine, published a cover on his academic fraud, virtually the publication’s entire print mysteriously disappeared.

Prior to joining Obasanjo’s administration, Uba ran a middling “healthcare” services operation in California. Yet, in 2004 U.S. officials seized cash of $170,000 that Uba had taken into New York City. The cash, concealed from U.S. authorities, was then handed over to a Loretta Mabinton. She used most of it to buy a Mercedes Benz car for Uba, and $45,000 to buy equipment for Obasanjo’s farm in Otta.

Confronted on the smuggled funds, Obasanjo blithely stated that Uba was a wealthy man prior to working for the presidency. It was – let’s be blunt – a blatant lie.

There’s little question that Uba is in possession of a stupendous amount of cash, the source of it a question that Nigerians must raise. It’s a mark of the monumental dysfunction that’s Nigeria that this man is in court asking to be crowned governor rather than in the dock explaining how he accumulated all that wealth.

Uba’s imposition on Anambra would amount to a war on the people’s will – to say nothing of the taint on the name of justice.
Read full post

Honoring Mothers' Day and the passing of Mildred “Mum” Haynes (February 18, 1921 - April 16, 2009)

"...whether you have actually birthed a child or not, the biological process that we call “pregnancy” is hardly a sufficient condition for claims of being a mother, nor is it even a necessary one..."

Dear friends,

We are all familiar with the longstanding adage: Behind every great man is a great woman. But that woman, as it were, is not always a wife or “soul mate”. In other words, she can be a mother, aunt, sister, daughter, or even a female cousin, in-law, or friend and colleague, as well.

Moreover, sometimes, a person can serve a role in your successes in life that are not easily discernible. This often happens in the lives of parents, because we are sometimes unaware of the contributions that others have quietly made to the progress of our offspring, since such folks are acting out of genuine love and expecting nothing in return, so theu don’t bother to remind us of what they have done for us.

Beginning in my early childhood and lasting throughout my adult life until now, Mildred Haynes, the wife and lifelong partner of the late and great Cameron Vincent Haynes (who passed in 2003) and mother to my lifelong and oldest friend, Kenny Haynes, played a consistent role as my second mother. And the range of that role, both emotionally and intellectually, was as wide as that which my own mother has and continues to play. That is, from the look at me of disappointment to the glee and supportive words of encouragement, Mum, as I call her (just as all four of her own children do) reached into herself and showed real love and concern for me as a child, and, into my older years, as an adult.

While there are many examples, I have two specific incidents that occurred between us that I have never shared with any other person before now. I have never talked about them to my mother, my father - who I knew briefly during my late teenage years, a single one of my siblings or friends, neither of my first or second wives, or any of my children. The first incident happened during the summer of 1971. It was a hot day in July. I was going through some serious life changes at the time. Having spent the past couple of years as a very active member of the Black Panther Party, I had just only a few weeks or so earlier left the Panthers.

Now, I must say that a couple of my very close friends had informed me over those two years that their mothers et al. had told them to stay away from me, because I was a Panther (please recall that the F,B.I.’s J. Edgar Hoover had called us the number one threat to internal security in America) Yet, I always felt welcome in the Haynes’ house and around all the family members. After all, they had known me ever since I was about eight years old, when I anxiously joined the Cub Scout troop of Vinny Haynes (who I called always “Pop”, beginning in my early adult life). Also, growing up, I had gone on trips with the Haynes family, from Boston to New York City. Again, my activism in the Black Panther Party did not affect their relationship with me one bit.

But here I was, on a hot July day in 1971. I had another friend with me. We stopped by the Haynes’ old house on Haskins Street, in the Roxbury section of Boston, Mass. After speaking briefly to Mum, my buddy and I went upstairs and hung out with Kenny, for about an hour or so, listening to music and rappin’ with each other. As my other buddy and I were leaving, with him stepping outside first, I turned to say goodbye to Mum as she started to walk up the stairs to the second floor of the house. She stopped and looked at the brown paper shopping bag that I held in my hand. I already had the bag in my hand when I first came in the house. But, apparently, she had funny vibes about the bag. So she glared into my eyes. Many thoughts were running through my mind at that point. I had never seen that look on her face before – or since. She said nothing. The two of us had ours eyes locked into each other’s and we were in a kind of Twilight Zone that lasted for about ten seconds. She looked angry and disappointed, but she also transferred the idea and feeling to me that she knew that I was better than that. I was embarrassed. And I was ashamed of myself. She turned and continued upstairs and I walked out of the house.

As I said earlier, this is the very first time that I have shared that experience with anyone. I was 17 years-old then. In the coming years, I would take some very positive steps towarda returning to and maintaining my social activism as well as enhancing my scholarship, building a family and having a productive future for myself, my family, and my community.

Additionally, while I moved from Boston in 1978, when boxing legend Joe Frazier brought me to Philadelphia and signed me as a professional boxer, my friendship with Kenny and the rest of the Haynes family remained just as strong. When I moved back to Massachusetts in 1987, I settled down with my own family of a wife and three children in Amherst. Whenever we visited Boston - which was only once or twice per year, because it is 100 miles away, almost always, we would be sure to stop by Perrin Street and see Mum and Pop Haynes. And so my/our children grew up knowing them.

In any case, one day, during the early-Nineties, I called their house in order to see whether or not Pop had received copies of some published articles of mine that I had sent to him. Mum answered the phone that day. She told me, gleefully, “Vinny’s not here, but he got your package”. Then she said something that no one else who has known me since my early childhood, except my own mother, had ever expressed to me. She said, “You finally found something that you like.” She continued, “You’ve tried everything. Now you have something that you really like doing.” She was talking about my writing, of course.

I found Mum’s observation to be incredibly profound. While it has never been much of a source of income for me, writing has been one of my primary passions. Certainly, more than anything else, as an artist, a writer wants to be “read”. So I am overjoyed that the appreciation for what I have to share is revealed by the fact that on any given day, this blog, Djatajabs.com, that I only started 10 months ago, is being read worldwide, by people in 39 countries (not including the US) - and growing, daily. My motivation is in no small part due to the encouragement of loved ones like my Mother ad Mum Haynes.

So on this day that we honor mothers, even though I will no longer be able to, as I occasionally did, send cards or flowers to this great woman, Mildred “Mum” Haynes, those like me who have had the personal fortune of actually receiving her care and concern - her love - will acknowledge her too. Additionally, as Mum made it so clear to me long ago, if you truly love your own children, then you must love your neighbors’ children as well. For it is only through our relatedness to others that we can love at all, which includes the capacity for us to love ourselves.

Moreover, as Mum proved with her deeds, whether you have actually birthed a child or not, the biological process that we call “pregnancy” is hardly a sufficient condition for claims of being a mother, nor is it even a necessary one. Rather, only by actively engaging in and sharing the power of love with others, regardless of blood lines, is a person then able to recognize the interconnectedness between love for one’s self as well as other people and things that will help the latter grow.

No, Mum has not died. She has simply passed into another form of existence. And her contributions will continue to be played out, in an oh-so-subtle fashion. That was her style.

Finally, at least to me, it seems that, unless she is a celebrity of some sort, when a woman passes, there is not much fanfare as when a man ceases to exist in the living form. Yet, all of that has to do with Male Supremacy which must be abolished from all human societies as does White Supremacy (that affects less people, but is equally despicable).

Besides, men started it (i.e., the battle of the sexes). Consequently, it is we who must end it. Men must stop hiding behind our insecurities and illusions, and accept the fact that the human race is made up of groups of individuals who all have strengths and weaknesses of some sort and, as a result, in that context, we are all equals.

So to whom are you grateful today? To be sure, it is easy to find excuses to be angry with your parent(s). As a matter of fact, excuses are like unpaid bills; that is, you can always find one. Nevertheless, on her 75th birthday, nine years ago, after giving her a small celebration, along with the youngest of my/our two daughters, as I walked out of the door to her apartment, I exclaimed to my Mom, “Thanks for bringing me into this world!”

In any case, today, I must “Holla!” - Happy Mother’s Day!!! – to all females who have mothered other people or even non-human animals, whether you birthed them or not.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus

Read full post

HAMAS - Liberators or Terrorists?

"Hamas (حماس Ḥamās, an acronym of حركة المقاومة الاسلامية Ḥarakat al-Muqāwamat al-Islāmiyyah, meaning "Islamic Resistance Movement") is an Islamic Palestinian socio-political organization which includes a paramilitary force..."



Dear friends,

Particularly mainstream media in the US lump both HAMAS and Al Qaeda together in the same category as “terrorists”. The idea is: terrorism is a great act of “evil”.

However, if we use history as a guide, terrorist actions are often not just carried out by mean-spirited people for the sake of “evil”, as it were. Rather, they seem to be used mostly, in fact, as part of a larger plan that lesser military powers carry out against their more potent and larger foes for the former’s intent to gain autonomy.

Moreover, the role of HAMAS is not simply terrorism. After all, their main duties appear to be administrative ones where they are responsible for providing social services to the citizens of Gaza, from food and health care to education. This aspect of their work is rarely, if ever, mentioned the mainstream media of the West.
At any rate, in a short but informative discussion/interview with noted Jewish scholar Neil Zagorin, he and I shared ideas about the role of HAMAS in the Israel/Occupied Palestine mess.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
*******************************

Djata: Hey Neil, talking about HAMAS in the US in anything other than a negative light seems to bring uneasiness among a certain part of the population.

Neil: HAMAS is treated like such a bogeyman that it's hard to say anything positive about it without making it seem naive and easily dismissible.

Djata: Neil, personally, I see HAMAS as a grass roots, freedom-fighting group. How do you see them?

Neil: Virtually every organized Palestinian group in the past century has striven for Palestinian freedom in one way or another, as far as I can tell. If you’re asking whether I see HAMAS as primarily motivated or inspired by the struggle for freedom, I’d say that’s a main factor.

Djata: In the context of their religious/political direction, do you consider HAMAS part of the body of Islamic fundamentalists who seem to be controlling an increasingly larger portion of the Middle East?

Neil: They are an Islamist group that seeks a Muslim renewal of some sort. Of course, the perceived need for that should be seen in the context of the dispossession and lack of freedom Palestinians have endured in the past century. It’s been fashionable, at least in the US, to view Islamism negatively, but I don’t think we should resort to stereotypes. If Al Qaeda is towards the far end of an Islamist spectrum, the ruling party of Turkey, with whom the West seems able to live respectfully, is at a different part of that spectrum. I would be cautious about concluding that HAMAS is like Al Qaeda.

Djata: But if HAMAS is simply another “terrorist” group, then why do they have so much support from everyday Palestinians?

Neil: Hamas would not be where it is without tremendous grass-roots support among Palestinians. As I understand it, HAMAS has earned a reputation for being more honest and competent in discharging administrative duties than the Palestinian Authority. They have earned respect for being confrontational with Israel in a context where 15 years of negotiations have not produced a 2-state solution, but have produced significant Israeli settlement in the West Bank that threatens to make a 2-state solution impossible.

HAMAS will use brute force to achieve political goals within Palestinian society, but brute force is a common tool in that region. The reasons for that are many and complex, and HAMAS is not the roughest group in that part of the world. In the end, for a combination of reasons, HAMAS commands grass-roots support, even among Palestinians who are not Islamist, or even Muslim.

Djata: Do you agree with the US government not wanting to include HAMAS in the dialogue?

Neil: The governments of both the US and Israel have dealt with and do deal with HAMAS. They both tolerated, if not enabled, HAMAS to get started a generation ago, seeing it as something that could counterweight the Palestinian secular radicalism of the PLO and similar groups. Now that HAMAS is a genuine national force, they still deal with them. There’s been quiet cooperation, at times, between Israeli government officials and Palestinian officials who are Hamas members on administrative matters pertaining to daily life. Israel negotiated one truce arrangement with HAMAS last summer, that is, in 2008, that was relatively successful in keeping armed conflict damped down for the duration of its limited scope, even if it was unsuccessful in other ways, particularly in having border crossings into Gaza opened as HAMAS wanted.

Israel and the US deal also with HAMAS by publicly rejecting a direct relationship, and treating it confrontationally. That is also a way for one political actor to deal with another political actor.

Djata: Yes, I understand your point; however, the Obama administration seems to be following the same path as the Bushies did, by not acknowledging HAMAS as a crucial group in the process regarding dialogue that will lead to solving some of the problems that both Israel and Palestine face.

Neil: If you’re asking me whether I think it would be better for the US government to deal openly and directly with the HAMAS-led government in Gaza, I think that it would. The objection at this point is usually that HAMAS is a terrorist organization, or is a bunch of Muslim fanatics, or is rejecting of Israel’s right to exist.

Djata: One of the points that are made against HAMAS is their use of Palestinian civilians as “targets:, during their confrontations with Israel. Is that your position?

Neil: Yes, HAMAS has been willing to harm civilians, and to create fear among civilians, as tools to achieve political aims, which is a definition I would use for terrorism. Yes, HAMAS is an Islamist political entity that has striven for Muslim rule over all of historic Palestine, though some segments of Hamas say they would be willing to settle for a 2-state solution. Substitute “Israel” for “HAMAS” and “Zionist” for “Islamist” and “Muslim” in the preceding sentences, and see how they read.

Yes, HAMAS says it can’t recognize Israel. This is for theological reasons, as I understand it: all lands that were historically under Muslim control should remain under Muslim control. Some people in HAMAS speak of long-term truce that could be extended indefinitely as a method of co-existence with Israel. They may be sincere, or not. In honesty, this is an alien type of political view to me, a Westerner. Look at the Israeli body politic; at this point, though, there’s reason to doubt that it has the intention and will to negotiate a settlement with Palestinians in which Palestinians actually achieve some real independence.

The point of this is that if the US wants to only deal with groups that are politically high-minded and dedicated to non-violence, it may as well pack up and go home. If the US wants to be involved to foster a resolution that will bring some kind of justice and normal life to the region, it should deal with major players. Hamas has a real presence in Palestinian society, it represents a genuine spectrum of Palestinian opinion, it may well be a reality-based player that would adapt to being included in the mainstream by behaving as a mainstream player. Will it become “moderate” in its view of Israel? Doubtful, but let’s be honest, there’s little real moderation in that part of the world. In any case, it would take a long time after some kind of resolution of the conflict is put in place and works out well for most Palestinians to feel okay about the situation.

Djata: President Obama appears to be maintaining a hands-off position with HAMAS. If his administration maintains that stance, how will this help HAMAS become engaged in the dialogue?

Neil: The US has taken a stance of rejectionism vis a vis HAMAS for years, while the situation has gone from bad to worse. Congressmen and Senators have visited Gaza recently. It's hard for me to resist the conclusion that this is a form of dealing with HAMAS directly, if not openly. If so, maybe it portends something beneficial.
Read full post

Nigeria's politicians try some PR work

"Every citizen of a country deserves to be called a stakeholder. Yet, when Nigerian politicians speak about the country’s stakeholders, they usually mean the elements who spend their waking hours stealing from the public..."

"A fiesta of delusion"

By Okey Ndibe

Fond of airy rhetoric, Nigerian politicians love to accumulate meaningless words and delusive jingles. The latest fashion is the stark lie called re-branding. Nigeria’s re-branding craze is actually an old, useless idea squeezed into new, expensive clothes.

Mention the name Chukwuemeka Chikelu today and I bet many – perhaps most – Nigerians won’t remember him. Yet, he was the Information Minister in former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s government who came up with the notion of re-branding Nigeria’s image.

Chikelu’s was a silly gambit with a high price tag. His idea consisted of packaging a few Nigerian achievers to the world in order to counter negative reports about Nigeria. As ideas went, this one was patently hollow in conception and fated for failure. Every single naira spent on that project was a naira misspent. To begin with, the world didn’t need to be reminded that there are extraordinary Nigerians in every field of endeavor. The world already knew, and knows, that Nigeria has produced some of the best writers, top-rank doctors, enterprising scientists and researchers, and excellent teachers. As if to advertise its ineptitude, the government’s line-up of achievers included one or two questionable names, including an academic of minor stature who had used the press to inflate himself as a candidate for the Nobel Prize. A campaign based on reminding the world that Nigeria boasted men and women of high achievement was, then, bereft of purpose.

At any rate, since most of the Nigerian “geniuses” on the government’s propaganda list were based abroad, the world, if it paid attention at all, was apt to ask a few pointed questions. How come this country exports its best and brightest? With this cast of achievers, why is Nigeria in the calloused hands of rustics, “area boys” in agbada, clowns and mediocrities? With its parade of prodigious men and women, why did Chikelu’s Nigeria permit the likes of Lamidi Adedibu, Chris Uba, and Saminu Turaki to own the public space?

Every citizen of a country deserves to be called a stakeholder. Yet, when Nigerian politicians speak about the country’s stakeholders, they usually mean the elements who spend their waking hours stealing from the public, and plotting to embezzle ever more. They hardly ever include such admirable citizens as Gani Fawehinmi, Oyibo Odinamadu, Gamaliel Onosode, Balarabe Musa, Babs Fafunwa, Abubakar Umar, Eskor Toyo, and Bart Nnaji.

When Chinua Achebe dared to reject a tainted national “honor” offered by Obasanjo, Femi Fani-Kayode, speaking in his master’s name, vilified the novelist in the most caustic language. Yet, the same Obasanjo championed “Andy” Uba, a domestic aide who smudged Nigeria’s image by ferrying cash of $170,000 on a presidential jet bound for New York City – and had to pay a steep fine to the U.S. for breaking their currency declaration laws. The self-same Fani-Kayode once had occasion to dismiss Wole Soyinka as godless. He even went further, asking Nigerians to henceforth ignore the Nobel laureate on account of Soyinka’s alleged atheism. The dramatist’s real sin, we knew, was a refusal to shriek “Amen!” to Obasanjo’s divine delusions. In one breath, Soyinka was insulted; in another, Obasanjo feted Adedibu, a self-confessed thug and liar, describing the man as his leader and mentor. At best, then, Chikelu’s re-branding project had zero impact. At worst, it reminded the world about Nigeria’s habit of trumpeting its worst and ostracizing its best. Chikelu’s public relations campaign was fundamentally misconceived. It fizzled quickly, even before its author’s rustication from the cabinet.

This being Nigeria – a space where bad ideas are routinely granted new leases – current Information and Communications Minister Dora Akunyili has decided that re-branding (as re-tooled by her) is, again, what Nigeria needs. Akunyili is beloved by many Nigerians. Many of these admirers hope that, by some magic or miracle, she would succeed. But no magic or miracle would suffice. Her re-branding effort is as ill conceived as Chikelu’s version. One hates to rain on Mrs. Akunyili’s party, but the truth is that her re-branding project came stillborn.

There’s no international conspiracy to give Nigeria a bad name. Nor are Nigerians sourpusses who invent untenable grouses against their government. Nigeria is a potentially soaring story that’s become a tragedy-in-progress.

Part of Akunyili’s predicament is to serve a government produced by electoral fraud. How does she re-brand that? The same government, from the look of things, is gearing to rig the elections of 2011. How does she re-brand that?

Before our very eyes, and those of the world, the Obasanjo government squandered billions of dollars in an apparent scam that used power projects as an excuse. Yet Umaru Yar’Adua, the man Obasanjo handpicked, and other political “forces” in Abuja have effectively squelched a legislative report on the power scam. I’ll wake up and applaud when Akunyili persuades Yar’Adua to prosecute the “stakeholders” implicated in Halliburtongate, Siemensgate, Wilbrosgate, and a plethora of other scams. It’s not enough to wrap feces and present it as moi moi, to spray perfume on cow dung, and to apply deodorant on unwashed stinky armpit.
Read full post

Has Nigeria Become Underdeveloped?

"He should clarify the disturbing discrepancy between his sermon and his conduct, or he should simply exit the pulpit."

“Jonathan’s questionable gospel”

By Okey Ndibe

Two weeks ago, a newspaper carried a News Agency of Nigeria report under the caption, “We are a vain nation”. The quoted claim was not as important as the man who voiced it. In case you missed it, the statement was credited to Goodluck Jonathan, sidekick to Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, the slumbering disaster who presumes to govern Nigeria. Jonathan, a lecturer at the University of Port Harcourt before he made a foray into politics, reportedly “identified the pursuit of mundane things that are worthless to the country's development by both leaders and followers, as the cause of the nation's under-development.” Jonathan made this curious assertion during an Easter Sunday service at Aso Rock Chapel. In what NAN described as “an emotive address,” Yar’Adua’s deputy waxed diagnostic about Nigeria’s crisis. In his words, “What makes us remain the way we are, what makes us to be backward, is that we value those things that matter less to a society.”

At this point, those who’ve followed Jonathan’s political career would want to exclaim Wow! But wait, the man isn’t done yet. The news agency quoted the man as confessing that, “Having worked in the government for almost 10 years now, I know that most of the problems we have, are because of the vain and trivial things that charm us most.” Jonathan then recalled that Nigeria once shared the same developmental bracket as India, Brazil, Indonesia and Singapore, “but regretted that those countries had left us behind.” What accounted for Nigeria’s catastrophic slip? An answer was offered in the gospel according to Jonathan. As NAN reported, Jonathan “blamed past leaders for looting the treasury and stashing funds meant for the country's development in banks outside the country.” Again, in his words: “Nigeria has so much money stashed outside this country, most of the money stolen from the public treasury. If 50 per cent of these funds were brought back and kept in Nigerian banks they would have enough funds to give as loans. Our banks would not need to send girls to go out and hustle for deposits.”

Nor was this the end of Jonathan’s strange confessions. He stated that the embezzlers “do not even need 10 per cent of [their loot]” and that “some of them hide the money and their children will not even see it.” Having diagnosed the Nigerian disorder, Jonathan proclaimed the antidote. He implored Nigerians, wrote NAN, “to use the Easter period to purge themselves of mundane things and pursue things that would be beneficial to the uplifting of the nation.” Speaking with the earnestness of a prelate, he made a prediction: “if we sacrifice most of these artificial and mundane things that are not critical to us…this country will be a better place.”

Odds are that some speechwriter handed Mr. Jonathan this speech and – without pausing to rehearse it – he rushed off to the chapel to read it. Why did he not deem fit to reflect on this self-indicting speech before he mounted the podium with it? For that matter, why did he not see the wisdom of clearing the speech with his wife, Patience Jonathan, before reading it? Until former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s abracadabra installed Jonathan as “vice president,” Patience Jonathan was a target of investigations by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). In late 2006, agents of the anti-corruption agency seized close to $15 million dollars from Mrs. Jonathan, whose husband was then governor of Bayelsa. Two months earlier, the EFCC had frozen N104 million it also accused Mrs. Jonathan of attempting to stow away through one Mrs. Nancy Ebere Nwosu.

Given his family’s history, Mr. Jonathan’s sermon on the malaise of graft and greed is nothing less than fascinating. Could this Easter message be heartfelt – or was it just another hypocritical speech by a man who, like most Nigerian politicians, is beyond shame? If the man’s sentiments are genuine, then what has he done to censure his wife? Why hasn’t he invited the EFCC to go through with its investigation of his wife, and to haul her before the law if she’s found to have engaged in gluttonous embezzlement?

Beyond his wife’s questionable financial activities, Mr. Jonathan may also have a few personal questions to answer. A year and a half ago, this former lecturer responded to public pressure by making his asset declaration public. He declared that he was worth N295 million. How did he generate that stupendous level of income? As the Guardian columnist Sonala Olumhense noted, “this means he had been growing richer at the rate of close to N17 million per month” during the 17 months he was governor.

If Mr. Jonathan meant what he said in his Easter message, he owes it to himself to explain how he accumulated his fortune. And he should also explain how his wife came by the sums of $13.5 million and N104 million. He should clarify the disturbing discrepancy between his sermon and his conduct, or he should simply exit the pulpit.

Read full post

What is "African unity"? (originally published 6/27/08)

Below, is a version of a "Letter to the Editor" that I sent to the Philadelphia Inquirer the other day. Rather than print the just mentioned missive and encourage dialogue, like so many of the government- and corporate-controlled media outlets, they seem to have decided to do otherwise.

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Dear Editor:

While I'm sure that Trudy Rubin's piece, "Worldview: African unity can stop tyrant", posted June 25, 2008, regarding the need for "African unity" in order to rid the continent of tyrants like Robert Mugabe, is well-intended, what she did not point out in her article is: "African unity" was the mantra that overthrew European colonial rule, two generations ago. The result gave us a succession of "liberators" like Robert Mugabe and others who meant well, but became tyrants, because, before long, after independence, petty tribalisms and so forth - like "religious" squabbles, set in, and were, in fact, instigated by agents of the former colonial rulers.

Additionally, unemployment, which was already rampant under colonialism, became even worse, because the formerly colonized "leaders" had no understanding of running industry. After all, while European rulers and others have and still do take raw materials from the African continent, they send the aforementioned materials overseas to places like Asia and Latin America where they are refined into consumable products. Besides, when they left, the vindictive colonizers took everything that they "owned" with them (in many cases, they even took the light bulbs from the administrative offices that they had been forced to abandon). That meant that farming on a rather unsophisticated scale and petty merchantry would reign. People have to eat and sustain themselves. Hence, when it came/comes to government collection and expenditures, along with other matters, corruption necessarily followed/follows.

Therefore, the call for "African Unity", as it were, must first address the fact that, before the Europeans came there, Africans had a different direction. Moreover, to speak of "African unity" outside of that context may be well-meaning, however, it is shallow and useless. In other words, we've already been there. In fact, it is the continuous exploitative behaviors of Europeans and their offshoots in the Americas, by their maintaining the underdevelopment of Africa and other lands, that lend to the creation of Mugabe and his ilk, whether on the continent of Africa or here in the Diaspora - and the rest of the world.

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Map of Africa

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.travelnotes.org/Africa/images/africa2.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.travelnotes.org/Africa/index.htm&h=416&w=375&sz=14&tbnid=ZEefPRbV5z8J::&tbnh=125&tbnw=113&prev=/images%3Fq%3DAfrica&usg=__Mz6RL0kTU4ZuI_RwIGbTaEJkiKs=&sa=X&oi=image_result&resnum=1&ct=image&cd=1 Read full post

Sandy Banks features some women who are in the know

"The women seated around the table at the Thursday morning knitting club were senior citizens all right -- from 63-year-old Agavanoush Shakhverdian to Ida Capriole, three weeks shy of 92. But they were hardly quiet..."






Dear friends,

On the link below you'll find a piece that proves that women need only act and think for themselves, as opposed to the moronic suggestion that they should "act like a lady, but think like a man", and they will have long, happy, and productive lives. The author, Los Angeles Times veteran columnist Sandy Banks has been featured on this blog in the past.

One Love!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-banks21-2009mar21,0,5550888.column
Read full post

Al Martinez ponders Unemployment

" I’m not sure that unemployment heightens the senses. I don’t know that being apart from the crowd allows any special perspective. But involvement takes time and attention while isolation demands no such effort..."



Dear friends,

I am always honored to present work by my good friend, Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Al Martinez. After many decades of doing so, he is no longer working at the Los Angeles Times. Instead, he only works for himself now, and he is plenty busy. We all have powers within us that allow us to do many things, after all.

To be sure, loneliness is a condition that no human can escape, because, ultimately, we have to think for ourselves, speak for ourselves, eat for ourselves and go to the bathroom for ourselves. It is just that we live in such an "advanced" society that allows us to have so much "free" time, instead of having to spend all day foraging and hunting for food - as our ancestors did, that we can easily forget that our relationship to others is the basis for our prosperity. In other words, as a species, from the school janitor to the teacher to the police officer, bus driver, auto meechanic, grocer and carpenter, we all play a role in our cooperative effort to co-exust.

The sad part is: Historically, kids coming out of college have rarely had enough experiences in life to provide any kind of useful analyses for readers. At least to me, the whole process of becoming a journalist needs to be re-done. It has to be more than just a job. It must be a passion.

Finally, everyone wants to know something. However, far too often journalists censor themselves, because the point of so much of North American journalism has more to do with getting the reader riled up, as opposed to “informing in order to inspire”. Additionally, the editors have greater concern for their jobs as their occupations are determined by their bosses and advertisers (secondly). Moreover, at least to me, journalists must become more entrepreneurial ad band to gether to form their own news outlets. Part of the problem is the laziness that people get from taking a pavcheck, instead of earning their money based on a variety of skills they’ve developed over the years.

At any rate, on the link below is a very humorous but equally serious (i.e., thought-provoking) piece. Enjoy!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://almartinez.org/wordpress/?p=30 Read full post

More on Nigerian Politics

Ojo Maduekwe's crashing stock‏

by Okey Ndibe

Ojo Maduekwe’s crashing stockBy Okey NdibeForeign Affairs Minister Ojo Maduekwe should be ashamed of himself. Any man who lies against children is contemptible, and that’s exactly what Mr. Maduekwe did. Early in March, Mr. Maduekwe had traveled to Geneva as head of the Nigerian delegation to the United Nations Universal Periodic Review on human rights. The event is used to survey the state of human rights across the globe.

Last November, Britain’s Channel 4 TV had broadcast a documentary on Nigeria’s “witch children.” It was a harrowing look at the horrors visited on thousands of children in Akwa Ibom and elsewhere. These children are first stigmatized as witches and wizards and then subjected to excruciating torture.

In short, the program unmasked the human capacity for evil. Channel 4 took viewers on a graphic tour of some deranged churches and their so-called pastors and prophets who rake in huge profits from declaring children as witches. One of the featured “men of God” is a man named “Bishop” Sunday Ulup-Aya. A self-styled “poison destroyer,” he openly boasts that he had physically liquidated 110 witches and wizards. Ulup-Aya’s eyes appear glazed and his slurry speech suggests drunkenness. He’s shown ordering a child to drink a concoction meant to “destroy the poison” of witchcraft. Then the reporter informs us that the concoction is made of strong alcohol, a substance called “African mercury,” and the “bishop’s” own blood.

Hard as it is to imagine, the child who’s shown drinking the strange concoction is one of the lucky ones. The program revealed that some of the children are simply killed. Some are driven out, forced to live in the open like wild animals. Some are tied to trees and starved for several weeks. Some are disfigured with acid, scalded with boiling water, or scarred with fire. The camera showed a young girl in whose skull some superstitious fool had driven a six-inch nail.

This chronicle of gruesome torture is still available online. To see this unflinching portrait of cruelty, just go to www.youtube.com and type in “Africa's witch children”. But be cautioned: It’s a stark, wrenching expose. The images are hard to watch and impossible to rub out of one’s mind. When I first saw it four months ago, I sat before the computer and cried for a while. I shuddered with the shame of being a member of a society that, out of deep and festering ignorance, would unleash such violence on children.

What does it say about us when we stand pat and permit nefarious elements among us to brutalize children, including toddlers? Were the police ignorant about the bloody goings-on? Are we not all implicated, to one degree or another, by the dehumanization of vulnerable children?

A teeming league of fake pastors and ignorant seers prey on children, I believe, because the child-victims are largely voiceless, with few or no options to stand up in their own defense.

It was natural that the question of Akwa Ibom’s tortured children should come up at an international forum on human rights abuses. But when the question was put to Mr. Maduekwe, he reportedly replied that the “children were paid to say they were tortured.”

That’s a callous, despicable response. It’s either the minister never bothered to watch the Channel 4 report – in which case, his fitness for a ministerial post should be called to question – or he somehow felt it was okay to discredit victims of heinous human rights abuses. In that event, we should wonder whether Mr. Maduekwe has a heart at all.

The larger crime here is that, after Channel 4’s exposure of the shameful abuse of children, the Nigerian government pretended nothing was amiss. Mr. Maduekwe might have helped to mobilize a national effort to rescue the besieged children of Akwa Ibom. He might also have persuaded Mr. Umaru Yar’Adua to send a tough bill to the National Assembly stipulating stiff punishment for those who harm children in the alleged name of combating witchcraft.

Since Mr. Maduekwe failed to do this, he had no leg to stand on when he was asked what Nigeria was doing to save children from mindless abuse. Caught in a bind, a good diplomat might have bought time by stating that his government was weighing a number of corrective measures. Instead, Mr. Maduekwe compounded his government’s betrayal of these beleaguered children by painting them as rented scam artists.

This foreign minister took a low, cowardly road precisely because he knows that the children are in no position to counter his lie, much less drag him to court for defamation. Yet, in the court of public opinion – and especially in Nigeria’s humane sector where conscionable men and women care about the fortunes of children – Mr. Maduekwe’s stock has crashed to the bottom.

(okndibe@yahoo.com)
Read full post

April is National Jazz Appreciation Month (JAM)

Archie Shepp










April is National Jazz Appreciation Month (JAM)

Saturday Apr 25 3P NMathis Volunteers @ International Women In Jazz
Women’s Festival Fri – Sat 24 – 26 Apr @ St Peter’s Church NYC
212.935-2200/718.468-7376


Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or less.

Read full post

Can capitalism survive the current world economic crisis?

"...under the current capitalist model, the performance of big companies, from time-to-time meet a dead end, because, at some point, the continuous seeking of profit in and of itself, with no concern for how the success of the business relates to progress of people in communities - aside from the latter’s consumption - and how people live, will, invariably, lead to the dilemma where the “market” must necessarily reach a 'saturation point',.."

Dear friends,

The big banks decided back in the late 19th Century to allow businesses to depend on them for capital (called finance capital), rather than the latter getting their own capital (called industrial capital) by earning it. Actually, only the largest companiies of certain industries were given the privilege of getting finnce capital. It was a neat trick, because it meant that no one smaller could compete with them, since they (big companies) did not have to worry about waiting for revenues to keep daily operations, buying new equipment, setting up subsidiaries, or providing paychecks for their workers. As a result, monopolies were formed that made sure that there was no "free market".

Yet, under the current capitalist model, the performance of the big companies, from time-to-time meet a dead end, because, at some point, the continuous seeking of profit in and of itself, with no concern for how the success of the business relates to progress of people in communities - aside from the latter’s consumption - and how people live, will, invariably, lead to the dilemma where the “market” must necessarily reach a “saturation point”, as it were, where there are either less or no customers (i.e., consumers), since there will come a time when people will not buy, if for no other reason than the fact that everyone has all of that particular item that they want. Hence, the constant wars in which, especially, the US, Britain, France, and Germany engage so that they can establish new markets (i.e., new consumers).

In other words, you cannot have an infinite growth of the market, because there are only so many consumers who will want a product. Then what do you do? You have to change the values of society, so that the market reflects those values, instead of vice versa (which is where the US ad other big capitalist nations now stand). But that means giving up either power or wealth to maintain legitimacy. To be sure, the Bush family and others shun that idea.

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Brilliant analysis - with genuine humor

Sponsored by Rep. Tim Briggs, D-Montgomery County, it has 37 co-sponsors and asks everyone to turn out all lights for an hour to address global warming. It also urges Gov. Rendell to order "all lights in all Commonwealth buildings" switched off, too. Could make for a fun Saturday night at Graterford (a prison in Pennsylvania), eh?


Dear friends,

On the link below, Philadelphoa Daily News columnist John Baer delivers an incredibly brilliant, yet humorous, analysis of Pennsylvania state politics that could be applied to any of our fifty states. Enjoy!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20090323_John_Baer__Who_says_Legislature_does_nothing__Go_ask_any_box_turtle.html
Read full post

Oprah's school for girls in South Africa, is it worth it?

"...it seems that it would have made more sense for her to have simply funded some college students who were/are education majors here, with the intent of those particular young people going to Africa afterwards and setting up any number of projects and programs for specific African communities."


>
Dear friends,

I just read a report, on the link below, in the New York Daily News on line edition, written by a good friend of mine, Corky Siemaszko, about problems at Oprah Winfrey’s school in South Africa for young girls. What timing, I thought. Here it is the end of Women’s History Month for us, and we are being brought more bad news about this school.

With issues like violence against women – in all forms, health care, and poverty which are, to me, far more important than red herring topics like “global warming” and “terrorism”, much less adolescent shenanigans, what is really the problem now, with Oprah’s generous $43 million venture?

And what about the teachers at this school? Who are they? I ask that, because I know from many decades of teaching experience, as well as study, that what a student should get most from a teacher is not a particular subject or its material, but, rather, s/he should follow the ideals of that teacher, like Confucius said: as a listener follows the tunes of a good musician. For it is those traits like kindness, attentiveness, concern, enthusiasm, and persistence that will remain applicable with the student -for life, not just a semester or two.

Also, what role do parents play in the school? Private schools where students are boarders are a far cry from ones where kids go home everyday after school. Even more insults can happen than at a day school, since the students live together.

Still, should the students learn to be leaders who uplift their communities? And how will South Africa itself benefit culturally, if the parents are not an integral part of the educational process? To be sure, the idea that a culture can develop without any connection to the past (except its increased availability of consumables) is a contradiction in terms. Hence, the notion of "youth culture", for example, is designed to exploit the vast and seemingly endless energy and enthusiasm of young people. Yet, it seems, at least to me, that the energy and courage of youth should, actually, serve the purpose of moving society forward - but only under the guidance of that part of society (parents and other elders) that has both the experience and understanding to recognize the values that maintain both its humanity and spirituality.

Yet, Oprah, an African American, has no concept of what it is like to be a girl growing up in South Africa. She can only understand South African culture within the context of her own personal cultural experience. So with what culture is she expecting these young girls to identify? Does she want them to be African American? Or, perhaps, European American?

Worse yet, regarding the educational input of their parents and other elders, culture has no meaning once taken out of the context of a reproductive process. A people who cannot reproduce themselves as a people will cease to exist as a people and become part of something else. This is not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. For example, the culture that held Africans in slavery, in this country, could no longer reproduce itself in that form and had to change, because of the well-deserved hostility and resistance it engendered.

Moreover, whether here or in South Africa, children need direction, if they are to replace us and make the society better. However, they need to feel as if they are a part of the whole process, in the end. Therefore, let us stop asking children what they want to be, in the context of what they will possess, when they grow up. Instead, let us ask, what they want to be, regarding their relatedness to others. Let us ask, "How will you help the community when you grow up?" Let us ask, "What kind of work will you do to help people when you grow up?"

Finally, at least to me, Oprah has not made an appropriate management decision that will bring beneficial results, of any magnitude, to these girls in South Africa. As a matter of fact, for example, far more young people who have recently gone to Africa, from the US alone, are already engaging in projects there that are doing much more, with fewer financial resources, than Oprah’s school can possibly be doing. Consequently, it seems that it would have made more sense for her to have simply funded some college students who were/are education majors here, with the intent of those particular young people going to Africa afterwards and setting up any number of projects and programs for specific African communities. After all, from coast-to-coast, in our nation, there are major universities with large education departments that have loads of great Black educators who themselves have an even greater amount of both present and former African American as well as European American graduates who would be quite eager to meet such tasks more than adequately.

Still, it may not be too late for Oprah to correct this mess. In the discipline of management, we call it an “exit strategy”. That is, ultimately, in management, sometimes the question is not: How can I fix this? Rather, it is: How quick can I get out of this? As a matter of fact, President Obama’s new demand for two of the Big Three automakers to get their acts together points to the reality that the White House is making it known that they now have an exit strategy away from all of this “Bailout” mess. Oprah may want to consider taking a hint from her/our friend.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/03/30/2009-03-30_o_no_not_again_oprahs_school_rocked_by_s.html
Read full post

THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMEN: An African Perspective (originally posted 6/30/08)

Dear friends,

Considering all of the recent attention that has been given to Africa, due to the outrageous acts of Robert Mugabe and his supporters, below, I am sharing a book review that I wrote fourteen years ago (1995), for the now-defunct African World magazine. It helps put the conditions and relationships of the people of the continent of Africa, as a whole, in a more realistic perspective.

G. Djata Bumpus


Book review, by G. Djata Bumpus

THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMEN: An African Perspective (102 pages)
by Florence Abena Dolphyne

Ghana Universities Press
Accra, Ghana (1991)

Printed by Assemblies of God Literature Centre Limited, Accra

"What is Africa to me:
Copper sun or scarlet sea,
Jungle star or jungle track,
Strong bronzed men, or regal black
Women from whose loins I sprang..."
Countee Cullen, African American poet

************************************
In spite of its imperfections, this small book is quite important. For it introduces genuine dialogue as well as plans for action in its description and promotion of solutions to the plight of the female preservers of African cultures - that is, African women. With a good deal of the focus on Ghana, the author, Professor Florence Abena Dolphyne (University of Ghana), highlights the International Women's Year in 1975 and the United Nation's Decade for Women (1976-85) as the initial springboards that helped launch a movement that has been slowly making its way through Africa for the last 18 years. Undoubtedly, this publication is a tough "pill" for millions of African men to swallow.

Moreover, Emancipation does several things. They are: 1) It firmly establishes that Western feminists do not have a monopoly on theories pertaining to the oppression of women. 2) It asserts that African women have solutions to their problems within the context of their own cultural backgrounds. 3) It emphasizes action over pretense.

Dolphyne insists that the guiding force for African women, regarding issues relevant to their survival, should be action for change. Thus, she avoids succumbing to the cultural hegemony of fanciful Western feminists. Furthermore, Dolphyne maintains, "I never considered and still do not consider myself a 'feminist', for the term evokes for me the image of an aggressive woman who, in the same breadth, speaks of a woman's right to education and professional training - as well as a woman's right to practise prostitution and lesbianism." Many African American women too complain about the connection between Western feminism and lesbianism. Perhaps, Western feminists' lack of respect for the diverse sexual as well as other cultural practices of non-Western women explains why female circumcision (specifically, clitoridectomy) is their most prominent concern - even amongst many African American women - when analyzing the oppression of African women on the continent.

At times, Professor Dolphyne's perspective is confusing, however. For example, in the introduction (preface), she shares, "... there is the Palestinian woman who has to bring up her children in the violent environment of a refugee camp... Then there is the South African woman who has to cope with bringing up her children single-handed in a squatter camp...There is also the woman in an African village who watches helplessly while her child dies of malnutrition and preventable diseases...For all these women, the issue of women's emancipation cannot be separated from the politics that brought about their situation." Obviously, at least at this point of her work, Professor Dolphyne appears to be employing an inclusive writing style (later in the book she even mentions that young African boys need mandatory and free formal education as much as their female counterparts.) Yet, for whatever reasons, the author absolutely never draws a connection between African women on the continent and their sisters in the Diaspora.

Not surprisingly then, Dolphyne makes no mention of the relationship between Pan-Africanism and the worldwide liberation of all African people.
On top of that, although Professor Dolphyne herself represents the legacy of Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, she deliberately took a swipe at the great statesman and philosopher by calling his government, on her first mention of it, a "regime".

Some of the problem seems to rest in the author's use of the "discipline" of cultural anthropology for her theoretical basis. Perhaps, this may help explain some of the book's shortcomings. For cultural anthropology, at least to me, is a euphemism for racial science. It recognizes trivial aspects of any given people's existence while ignoring the necessary relationships that folks must enter into in order to feed themselves. As a result, the culture of a people is defined (sophisticated or unsophisticated, that is, inferior or superior) within the context of its corresponding features or lack thereof with the "higher aspects" (i.e., visual art, music, religion, and so forth) relative to those fabrications that are identified as European cultures.

The subject matter of the text is divided into three chapters. In the first chapter, called "Traditional Practices," the author gives the reader an overview of the psycho-socio as well as economic factors of familial relationships between males and females in African cultures, revealing the status of most - but not all - women in African cultures as property. However, Dolphyne makes it clear that, unlike European cultures (which are not very old), African cultures are steeped in long traditions, many of which (for example, polygamy, child marriage and female circumcision) are quite acceptable to the practitioners. She, therefore, sees one of the real solutions for combating social inequality as, "...it is crucial that basic formal education be made available and accessible to both boys and girls in all (African) countries if any headway is to be made in eradicating, or even modifying the traditional practices that continue to keep women in subordination in Africa." Dolphyne also points out that many of the decisions that African women have made historically regarding their personal relationships have been based on economics. As a result, she sees it as pertinent to African women's emancipation that they have the "independent" ability to care for themselves and their children.

The second chapter, "Promoting Women's Emancipation through Specific Activities," details some of the methods and programs instituted - in this case, Ghana specifically - that have helped to raise "self-esteem and self-confidence" in many women. Moreover, Professor Dolphyne asserts that while there are some women with respected status in African nations, "Such hereditary position of authority is, however, not accessible to the majority of women." The author then continues to reiterate the need for formal education and economic independence for African women as a major step towards emancipation.

Unfortunately, Dolphyne does not provide readers with a clear understanding of certain concepts - such as role model, formal education, and economic independence - that she uses repeatedly throughout this chapter, particularly, and the book, generally. After all, the meanings of most social terms are not the same for everyone. That is, a member of a particular social, political, and economic class will necessarily have an entirely different understanding of or appreciation for a specific social concept than a member of another class, even though both persons live in the same society.

Anyhow, the final chapter, "The Way Forward," mainly identifies, uncritically, those organizations or groups that have participated in providing assistance to Ghanaian women in the past 15 years or so. One of the groups favorably mentioned (more than once in the book, regrettably) was US AID. To be sure, AID (Agency for International Development) - a U.S. government bureau - has not been good for Africa, either economically or environmentally (see America the Poisoned, by Lewis Regenstein). Yet, here Professor Dolphyne seems to be playing the role of being a "pragmatist" - one must suppose. Is it wise to attain "freedom at any cost"? In fact, is said freedom acquired at any cost, really desirable?

It may be instructive for us to refer to an article by Elizabeth Schmidt that appeared in a journal called Food Monitor-No. 5 (July/August 1978) during much of the same period that Dolphyne points to as being relevant to some African women's economic progress. The article is about the effects of OPIC (Overseas Private Investment Corporation), another U.S. government "aid" agency. Created in 1969 by an amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act, according to its architects, OPIC was intended to "serve as an impetus to private investment in developing economies". Actually, their claim is misleading. As Schmidt recorded:

Although it would be unfair to write off all OPIC-sponsored projects as detrimental, their actual developmental impact is negligible. In 1976, an OPIC loan helped to establish the Pioneer Food Cannery in Ghana, a joint enterprise of Starkist Foods, Inc., and a Ghanaian businessman. The cannery, a renovated Russian mackerel cannery, has the capacity to annually produce 206,000 cartons of canned tuna and 67,000 cartons of tuna cat food. Nearly all of the tuna is exported to Western Europe.

Sorry Charlie, but something here is not right. It looks as though the purpose of OPIC, judging by its actions as opposed to its rhetoric, has been to insure that Western "transnationals" maintain control in the so-called Third World. As the late Walter Rodney taught us some time ago in his classic, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, and Lloyd Hogan informed us in his equally important Principles of Black Political Economy, whether male or female, African peoples cannot possibly expect to have meaningful political or economic freedom, without control over the manner in which we acquire access to a food supply along with the "artificial" or human-created needs which result from the prolonged existence that adequate nutrition provides.

In summary, Professor Dolphyne has articulated the particularities of the African woman's often powerless condition. Also, THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMEN: An African Perspective is a healthy contribution to the current dialogue regarding this matter. Yet, the omissions mentioned earlier involving Dolphyne's lack of clarity when presenting certain ideas as well as her unwillingness to challenge the harm still being done by transnational corporations to the development of a united Africa should not be taken lightly.In other words, although this book is highly recommended, not only for Africans on the continent, but those in the Diaspora, as well, Emancipation does have a number of noticeable shortcomings. Nevertheless, there are some extremely important messages delivered in this work. Perhaps, the most significant one being: People who are filled up with Western culture have no right to assume that their understanding of the problems of people from other cultures are even relevant, much less valid.
Read full post

Why do we use the term "African American"? (originally posted July, 2008)

"African Americans are a people who grew out of the mixing of various groups of African peoples (that is, individuals who belonged to many cultural backgrounds throughout, mostly, West Africa). We were forced to unite because of our shared oppression and exploitation..."

Dear friends,

Booker T. Washington wrote, "During the period of servitude in the New World, the Negro race did not wholly forget the traditions and habits of thought that it brought from Africa. But it added to its ancestral stock certain new ideas."

I am an African American (I do not use a hyphen, because I refuse to consider myself an abbreviated American.) Yet, many of my fellow countryfolks feel confused about how they should address African Americans, generally, because it seems as though our terms of self-description change from time to time...

However, the term itself (African American) is not new; rather, it points to the natural direction being taken by a people who grew out of a distinct cultural experience, having survived the ravages of time, in a nation that is founded upon both greed and white supremacy. Therefore, by calling ourselves African Americans, we are merely returning to our true identity as human beings.

NOTE: When people hear the term "white supremacy", they usually either think of those who parade around in white bedsheets - like the Old South's KKK (Ku Klux Klan) or others, in blue uniforms, such as the FOP (Fraternal Order of Police) in places like Philadelphia and New York City. In other words, many citizens in this country do not see themselves as "white supremacists", per se. However, I use the term “white supremacy”, because a person can come from any European, Asian, or Latin country tomorrow, completely disregard his or her true familial past and declare himself or herself “white” - thus becoming part of an artificial "majority" group. Additionally, by calling himself or herself "white", that same person just mentioned, automatically, inherits a history that includes the likes of the original Pilgrim group, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln (none of whom, as far as I know, are of either Irish, Italian, Polish, Russian, German, Asian, "Hispanic", Jewish, or French descent), along with enjoying privileges and advantages over me and people who look like me.

Although around 130 years or a little more than five generations ago, author and formidable scholar George W. Williams asserted that, at the time, many African peoples worldwide preferred to be called "Negro" (see his History of the Negro Race in America), it appears that the expressions "Negro" and "colored" actually gained their popularity after the North American Civil War. Available literature only shows that prior conflict, the word "Africa" almost always prefixed the names of our organizations.

For example, beginning during the last quarter of the 18th Century, with Richard Allen and his friends' Free African Society, in Philadelphia, to the founding of the A.M.E. (African Methodist Epsicopal) church, which spread across the nation soon afterwards, all the way to the Afric-American Female Intelligence Society of Boston - a highly-respected activist group that existed for more than 40 years or almost two generations before and during the North American Civil War, we never forgot our African origins.

As well, because of the proliferation of the abolitionist movement that grew correspondingly with the manumission of each captive worker (so-called slave), Black self-help groups, whose purposes were for the economic and social progress of the aforementioned manumitted captive workers, began to flourish. One such group was the Peace and Benevolent Society of Afric-Americans of Connecticut - which thrived around the same time as the previously-mentioned women's group (see Black Abolitionists, by noted historian and scholar Benjamin Quarles. Also, there is other literature concerning African American organizations corresponding with that period in works like Lerone Bennett's classic, Before The Mayflower.)

But is "Black" also a legitimate identity reference? I think that it is. In fact, if we take guidance from Professor Lloyd Hogan's classic "The Principles of Black Political Economy", we see that he has identified five criteria that distinguish African American or Black people as a group that has proliferated. for centuries, within its own environment. They are: 1) Common origins on the continent of Africa; 2) Common history of exploitation as a homogeneous slave working class for more than 250 years; 3) Common exploitation as a more or less homogeneous class of landless peasants for approximately 100 years in the southern United States; 4) Common experience of exploitation as a homogenous wage laboring class since the last generation or so of their history; and 5) Conscious individual acceptance of being Black.

Perhaps, the most crucial aspect of Professor Hogan's abovementioned criteria is the "conscious individual acceptance of being Black." After all, regardless of one's historical experience, at least in the United States, the term "Black" is usually pretty specific. For example, if people are talking about either Rudy from Saint Croix or Ludwig from Antigua, they call him a Caribbean or West Indian. If they are talking about either Okey or Sahalu from Nigeria, they call him an African. However, if folks are talking about Paul from Boston or Barry from Amherst, then they say, "He's a Black man."

Note: This should be spelled with an upper case "B", even though the standard has been set by "white" newspaper editors and educators who, usually, spell it with a lower case one (b). As usual, others outside of our group are defining us by their own measure, as opposed to us doing it for ourselves. Nevertheless, when referring to African Americans, "Black" is a proper noun - not a common one, because it points to a specific group. On the other hand, the lower case "w" should be used for "white", since those who embrace or "cling to" that moniker do not represent a specific culture. Therefore, it is a common noun.

There are, of course, many women of European descent who have had, at least, one child by a man of African descent. Our future president is such a person. Moreover, it is usually necessary for these kids to identify themselves as "Black", for two reasons. They are: 1) Such offspring often have non-pale skin complexions and, as a result, are automatically considered "non-white" anyway - and treated as such. 2) Their mothers typically call themselves "white", thus confusing said youths' about their all-important identities. Moreover, it places children in the position of having to choose sides, as it were. Yet, at least to me, it seems that no one should ever ask a child to choose sides, when it comes to loving his or her parents. Instead, we should only encourage each child to LOVE his or her parent(s). Period.

So, obviously, African Americans are not a monolithic group per se, due to our varied familial backgrounds, income levels and social statuses (as folks like the wealthy entertainer Bill Cosby remind us, when he labels so many of us the "lower echelon"). Nevertheless, because we can be found in all areas of society (except for the ruling class), our ideas and aspirations are quite diverse.

Additionally, a number of us have physical characteristics that make us indistinguishable from many other cultural groups (for example, European American, EarlyAmerican Native, Asian American, Latino, and so forth.) As a result, unwittingly, many non-African American citizens currently associate with African American people who may not even identify themselves as such. On top of all that has been mentioned thus far, as well, the fact must be appreciated that African Americans are a people who grew out of the mixing of various groups of African peoples (that is, individuals who belonged to many cultural backgrounds). We were forced to unite because of Our shared oppression and exploitation.

Prior to the North American Civil War, African Americans tended to form coalitions with EarlyAmerican Natives and, at times, European Americans too (particularly, Irish Americans). Note: I use the term "EarlyAmerican Natives" (with neither a space nor a hyphen between Early and American), as opposed to "Native Americans", because I find the latter term divisive - and offensive to many. After all, most citizens of this country feel "native" to this land. Consequently, at least to me, the feeling of both separateness and aloneness that already lingers, quite naturally, in each individual, in any civilization or culture, worsens. Therefore, I feel that we do not need to "add insult to injury", as it were, by using words that may cause some of the resentment and hostility that can be engendered when people feel that they are being excluded. Hence, in order to distinguish that particular body of people from all other groups in our society, I use the aforementioned term Early American Natives.

At any rate, the identity that we now use, African American, represents the evolution of a people who have, through no choice of their own, struggled together for equality, dignity, and justice, for centuries. This, obviously, has been the same dilemma for all other groups who have come here, outside of the early ruling class. In fact, after the North American Civil War, African captive workers (so-called slaves), according to international law, should have been offered the opportunity to return to Africa. Instead, these now former captives were hoodwinked into accepting partial citizenship and thrown into the plantation economy of sharecropping. As a result, our forebears began identifying themselves according to descriptions that were made by those who did not even acknowledge, much less respect, our aforementioned forebears' ability to know what was best for themselves and those future generations of African Americans that would follow.

Today, we are an African people, and the largest group of those in this country who call themselves "Americans" who have been here since the 17th Century. Period. Moreover, for centuries, there were always folks coming/being brought here from Africa, both legally and illegally; they reminded our ancestors of their former homes - and cultural experiences. Therefore, our forebears never lost all of that which was African in them. Rather, they passed it on to future generations. Therefore, as far as contemporary African Americans go, we have learned to express what is left of our "Africanisms", as it were, within a different context.

Finally, three generations ago, the great Marcus Garvey pointed out: "This propaganda of dis-associating Western Negroes from Africa is not a new one. For many years white propagandists have been printing tons of literature to impress scattered Ethiopia, especially that portion within their civilization, with the idea that Africa is a despised place, inhabited by savages, and cannibals, where no civilized human being should go, especially black civilized human beings." - Marcus Garvey (Philosophy & Opinions of Marcus Garvey, edited by Amy Jacques-Garvey)

One Love,
G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Cornel West on presidential candidate Barack Obama and "white supremacy"

Cornel talked about Barack Obama's precarious position of "showing love" to African Americans while courting many people who embrace "white supremacy".


Dear friends,

The very short video piece on the link below is from a conference that was convened by radio and television personality Tavis Smiley, during the recent presidential campaogn (2008). The segment airs comments by noted African American scholar/activist Cornel West, a man who I have known personally for many years. Cornel talks about Barack Obama's precarious position of "showing love" to African Americans while courting many people who embrace "white supremacy". Of course, at least to me, the broader question is: How can a nation that embraces "white supremacy" also claim to embrace "democracy"?

At any rate, Professsor West (Princeton University) is always straight to the point, yet highly philosophical - and, at least to me, mostly quite correct. Enjoy!

G. Djata Bumpus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXj3_pjTTwg
Read full post

Love & Boxing (originally posted 10/4/08)

Dear friends,

I am honored and proud to share a short (five minutes long) video with you that was done by noted Swedish clinical psychologist Erik Muten back in March of last year (2008)...

It was a spontaneous interview that he produced, using a few of his students as technicians and the like. You can view it, by either simply clicking on the link below or the title "Love and Boxing", under the label called "Videos", on the right side of the "Home"page.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-1631123079037883004&hl=en&fs=true
Read full post

Re: "Beauty Standards" for Women, an African American male perspective

"...especially women of African descent in the Americas need to appreciate their hair length and its texture, along with their complexions and bodies of whatever size, that those skin colors just mentioned have the honor of representing."
Dear friends,

From wanting their hair “long”, as opposed to short, to their dress and pants sizes, using terms like “petite” on one end, but “plus-size” and “full-figured” on the other, at least to me, these terms that most females use are done so in order for them to be a part of the “personality market” that is so ubiquitous in this market-driven, possession-oriented society. Additionally, I never hear males use the abovementioned terms for self-description.

Still, many African- and Asian-print designs, from body wraps (outfits) to hairdos, are gorgeous, if not stunning. And so the issue goes deeper than fashion. Does it not? It is about far too many people accepting what purport to be “European” beauty standards. The real laugh about all of this is: starting back as long as several millennia ago, all the way to the present, African and Asian women, particu;arly, knew and have known about everything from hygiene to dress, long before European females or their males mates knew much about anything other than how to make a heap of garbage. That is correct. We are talking about a stolen legacy.

In any case, especially women of African descent in the Americas need to appreciate their hair length and its texture, along with their complexions and bodies of whatever size, that those skin colors just mentioned have the honor of representing. Besides, as it has been said, "You cannot control what others think of you; rather, only YOU can control what you think of you."

Finally, in my opinion, any male who really loves females should appreciate any female within the context of her distinct aura of femaleness - physically, intellectually, and spiritually, regardless of her hair length, skin complexion, or body size. For, at least to me, it is only then that males are able to appreciate females as equals. Otherwise, if a male is unable to appreciate females as such, then he really has issues about his own "sense of self - and being". Dig? Peace.

G. Djata Bumpus


Read full post

Brief note to the New York Times about the "Economy"

"...the intention for infinite growth in a finite market of consumers must necessarily go bust, at some point."

To the Editor:

The article called “Geithner Calls for Major Overhaul of Financial Rules” By EDMUND L. ANDREWS and LOUISE STORY, Published: March 26, 2009, proves that neither Obama nor anyone in his administration knows anything about the financial system, much less how to improve it. The problem is not hedge funds or “greed” on Wall Street. Rather, it is the proliferation of finance capital which allows businesses to survive even when they are no longer creating customers. Moreover, the intention for infinite growth in a finite market of consumers must necessarily go bust, at some point.

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

In light of the Obama victory, Ronnie Polaneczky invites us to care (originally posted 11/14/08)

Nevermind black, white, yellow, red, or brown . How about African American, European American, Asian American, Early American Native, and Latin American, for example.

Dear friends,

I waited a week to post the piece on the link below, because I wanted the hoopla and celebration over President-elect Obama to have sudsided. To be sure, we need to change our language. After all, "language is thought". Have you ever said to yourself, "I can't think of a word for it."?

One of the main ways to accomplish that, at least to me, will be for people to start describing themselves according to their cultural pasts, instead of their skin complexions. Nevermind black, white, yellow, red, or brown . How about African American, European American, Asian American, Early American Native, and Latin American, for example? That way, we will be able tp recognize each other's humanity.

In any case, Ronnie Polaneczky of the Philadelphia Daily News, a longtime friemd of mine, presents a very powerful invitation for all of us here. Please both onsider and enjoy the caring and warmth that she shares.

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20081106_Ronnie_Polaneczky__My_wishes_for_a_new_American_vocabulary.html?adString=pdn.news/local;!category=local;&randomOrd=110608034620
Read full post

The passing of a True Legend Ioriginally posted 12/25/08)

Eartha Kitt's courageous pioneering and consistent display of confidence, whether in performance or in life, helped define artistic and social expression in this country and around the world. And it did so for both females and males, while inspiring so many women generally, for two and one-half generations.


Dear friends,

We all "come in - going out". We forget that while we are here caught up in the throes of life. Nevertheless, for me, the timing of her passing is quite interesting, because I was supposed to catch her performance with the Springfield (MA) Symphony Orchestra on my/our oldest daughter's upcoming birthday (Feb. 7, 2009). Tickets went on sale back in June, so I guess that this is a surprise to everyone.

Eartha Kitt's courageous pioneering and consistent display of confidence, whether in performance or in life, helped define artistic and social expression in this country and around the world. And it did so for both females and males, while inspiring so many women generally, for two and one-half generations. Yet, oddly enough, many, if not most, women in America, today, are unaware of her role as a liberator, as so many other women have now followed her.

At any rate, the link below gives a short biography of her.

One Love!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eartha_Kitt
Read full post

So Long - Mama Africa (originally posted 11/14/08)

Mariam Makeba aka "Mama Africa" (1932 - 2008)






Dear friends,

Almost forty years ago, I had both the pleasure and honor of meeting Mariam Makeba. At the time, she was married to Stokely Carmichael (later known as Kwame Ture). Stokely was the chief icon of the Black Consciousness Movement. Mariam was a celebrated singer and activist in her own right. The two had married not quite two years earlier.

They had been living in Africa, while Stokely studied under Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, the former president of Ghana and the main proponent of the concept of Pan Africanism at the time. On this, his first trip back to the States, word got out to activists in Boston's Black community that Stokely was coming through Logan Airport. In a hurry, a group of us, which included some Black college students from Northeastern University, were able to get a hall for him to speak and an honorarium. We then set out to get an audience. It wasn't difficult, considering Stokely's stature. The place was packed, by the scheduled time for Stokely to speak. This all happened in a matter of five or six hours, as I remember.

The last time that I ever saw Mariam Makeba was when we bid the couple farewell in the parking lot behind the building in which Stokely spoke. The two were arm-in-arm, smiling, beneath an umbrella, as the weather had become drizzly. I will always remember that hectic but incredibly positive experience.

On the link below, is a piece that I saw on the Website of WDAS radio in Philadelphia that gives a short biography of Mariam's life. Her spirit will live on in many.

One Love,
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.wdasfm.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=104659?feed=104653&article=4561480
Read full post

an upcoming tribute to Dr Barbara Ann Teer - a pioneering artist/activist

THIS EVENT IS SOLD OUT!!!

Please join AVERY BROOKS and ALICIA KEYS and other guests as they celebrate the launch of the 41st year andre-institution of theCommunication Arts Program Symposiums This Friday March 27, 2009 at 6:30PM Suggested donation $20 Students $10 It's about a thought provoking soul stirring evening...



Love lives forever." - Steveland Morris

Dear friends,

Dr. Barbara Ann Teer (June 18, 1937 - July 21, 2008) was featured on this blog during August of last uear, shortly after her passing. The info below is about an important upcoming event in New York City later this month. The work of this great woman continues.

One Love,
G. Djata Bumpus




SAVE THE DATE!!! March 27, 2009
Dr. Barbara Ann Teer's Institute of Action Arts will launch it's 41st Year with the re-institution of its Communication Arts Program Symposiums

Please join us:
Friday, March 27, 2009 at 6:30PM

for a thought-provoking and soul-stirring evening with
Avery Brooks, Alicia Keys, and other guests

Suggested Donation: $20 - Students: $10

http://www.nationalblacktheatre.org/

Read full post

President Obama's "joke" about the Special Olympics

"I accept his apology. It was sincere. It was meaningful. And it was nice of him to say that. Every athlete out there is just being the best they can...I bowl just for fun. The last time I bowled, I think I scored a 245. I actually could kick the president’s butt at bowling. But I wouldn’t make fun of him if I did.” - a Special Olympic athlete

Dear friends,

While I find it silly and petty for the mainstream media to make such a big deal out of President Obama's joke with Jay Leno Show on the Tonight Show, on the link below, the short piece from the Boston Herald makes it apparent that Obama’s quip was not planned, because, actually, it made no sense.

Therefore, it should have been left alone. President Obama was wrong, but what kind of integrity do government- and corporate-controlled media have, if they feel that that was "news"? Moreover, why are so many print journalists, for example, whining about possibly losing their jobs, because newspapers are not selling, when these type of tattle-tale stories about the president are all that they have to share?


One Love,
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1160032&srvc=news&position=0
Read full post

Re: Turning our weaknesses into strengths (originally posted 10/16/08)

What would you do, if you lost one of your five senses?
Dear friends,

You may have seen this short video on the link below, previously. However, considering the Herculean task with which Senator Barack Obama has been involved this past couple of years, with only three weeks remaining before the election, I thought it would be, perhaps, appropriate to share this delightful and inspiring piece. The young fellow who is the subject of the video, Ben Underwood, also helps us to understand why all of us are equals. That is, every human being has strengths and weaknesses. At least to me, that is what makes us equal - regardless of how talented or challenged we are either athletically or intellectually, or whatever "orientations" by which our society or the market defines us. Dig? Peace.

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c49dS76KhGc
Read full post

A response to my comments on President Obama's "State of the Nation" address

He doesn't at all sound like a former community organizer when he talks economics.

Dear friends,

The brief comments below were sent to me, via e-mail, in response to comments that I posted here on this blog on February 24(2009). They are in regards to President Obama's "State of the Nation" address last month (February). The author of the comments is someone who is very special to me, but who does not want to go on record in public, at this time, with criticisms of President Obama. Nevertheless, while he will remain anonymous, he has given me permission to print the missive. It is just too powerful for me not to share it.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
*****************************************
Interesting. I didn't listen to his speech, but it seems like there is no intention of any real discussion of real change. In that respect I think he's most guilty of trying to appease those in power.

He doesn't at all sound like a former community organizer when he talks economics. I'm hoping at least there is some sincerity in his education policy. I knew he was going to be weak against the military when he started talking about Afghanistan. One thing that no one is even going to consider addressing is why has this country so thoroughly entrenched itself in dependence on war. This is the real problem with the way this economy is organized. They have never been without a war and don't appear to be capable of existing without it as the major outlet and control for the economy.

The last couple of Bush years brought this to stark reality. Was it complete stupidity or just incredible incompetence that the US embarked on a war in which we ended up with a trillion dollar deficit while those we were fighting against came out of it with billions in surplus? Is not economics a major military front? Don't they use sanctions and embargoes and other economic weapons as part of a complete military strategy in the modern world? Then how did this come about? I choose to believe that the Bush family are and have for many generations been war profiteers. They certainly didn't lose money. Why couldn't they see to it that this country's people didn't lose and suffer? The whole charade is disgusting.
Read full post

AIG giving back money...what's that all about?

"At least to me, from "gay marriage" to "global warming" to the latest red herring issue "AIG bonuses", our federal government has yet to provide any relief to everyday citizens, in a variety of areas..."

Dear friends, At least to me, from "gay marriage" to "global warming" to the latest red herring issue "AIG bonuses", our federal government has yet to provide any relief to everyday citizens, in a variety of areas. Only the big banks and equally large businesses from here to Europe seem to be receiving benefits. Meanwhile, the consistently useless politicians of the US Congress are cashing in on our illusory "tax dollars", by holding "committees" and other such nonsense about making sure "the people's money" is being spent properly. Right.

What a laugh. The same Congress that enabled the impropriety now has imposed punitive taxes on the same people that the former were claiming to be helping by authorizing the "Bailout" in the first place. Worse yet, at least some of these people who received bonuses are not even in this country. Moreover, what will "giving back the money", which is 165 million dollars out of a “Bailout" package of almost 800 billion dollars, do for the current economic shortfalls of Americans?

The fact of the matter is: none of the "Bailout" money has any genuine "value" anyway. That is, through unconscionable maneuvering that makes Bernie Madoff look like a petty thief, the president. Congress, and the Federal Reserve Bank, like gangsters in a cellar, are simply printing up more and more money and giving facilitating more and more credit to big banks and companies.

And so, , for example, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said about one aspect of the "Bailout", called the Supplier Support Program, "...will help stabilize a critical component of the American auto industry during the difficult period of restructuring the lies ahead...The program will provide supply companies with much-needed access to liquidity to assist them in meeting payrolls and covering their expenses, while giving the domestic auto companies reliable access to the parts they need."

In other words, the "Bailout" money is simply more finance capital (please peruse my post called "The Federal Bailout - a panoply of illusions", re-posted on Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2009). Allowing banks to control the flow of capital of businesses will, inevitably, lead us right back to the present situation. Businesses must perform. Otherwise, let them go out of business! That is the way that it works for ordinary (i.e., smaller) businesses, after all.

Still, it is no accident that former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson who was Bush's guy and Geithner both have intimate connections with Goldman Sachs, a recipient of "Bailout" dollars. So why is Goldman Sachs not being asked to return their "Bailout" money, in what is so obviously a conflict of interests? Meanwhile, the other day, Bloomberg.com reported, "March 18 (Bloomberg) -- Goldman Sachs Group Inc., the largest U.S. securities firm to convert to a bank, closed above $100 in New York trading for the first time since Oct. 24 as investors gained confidence the company will become profitable. "

Finally, we are being told that American taxpayers own 80% of AIG? They also told us about Santa Claus. It is only military might that matters. Everything else is hogwash. That answers the question from my dear friend in the previous post.

One Love,
G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

More from Black Doctor Website

10 Best Fitness Tips For The Summer


Dear friends,

On the link below are some tips for the upcoming summer season, from a great
newsletter.

One Love, One Heart, One Spirt,
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.blackdoctor.org/articles.aspx?counter=26133
Read full post

Fatimah Ali puts the Rush Limbaugh issue in proper perspective

The fact that anyone as mean-spirited as Limbaugh will reportedly earn nearly $400 million over the next eight years as he continues to spread his venom should give every American pause. It says volumes about his employer, Clear Channel, which just months ago signed him to a $38 million-a-year deal, then chose Inauguration Day to fire 1,850 of his colleagues.



Dear friends,

On the link below, Fatima Ali of the Philadelphia Daily News, through meticulous research as well as thoughtful and uncompromising analysis reveals the hypocrisy of many Americans, along with Rush Limbaugh and his employer, Clear Channel, that allows him to maintain such a noticeable presence in our society. Personally, I am still baffled about why Limbaugh still receives so much attention/support, even after being arrested for engaging in the same kind of illegal activities that he himself had so vehemently denounced prior to his being caught. Go figure.

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/38846897.html

Read full post

Solomon Jones reminds us to "Hustle", no matter what economic times are like

"I'm not talking about the kind of hustle involving drugs and guns, or worse, the kind of hustle involving computers and wire transfers. No, I'm talking about the kind of hustle born of necessity rather than greed."

Dear friends,

These days, big banks and companies in the US whine about their profits being down, and, therefore, they claim that the "economy" is bad. However, on the link below, Solomon Jones of the Philadelphia Daily News, reminds us that it is people who make the economy work - not either corporate heads or passive investors. In other words, we all have both physical and intellectual powers, along with our own personal interests, that allow us to acquire that which we need. All we have to do is get on our "hustle". Dig?

Peace & Love,
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20090314_Solomon_Jones__Doing_the_hustle_-_North_Philly-style.html
Read full post

Elmer Smith on Madoff versus Ali Baba and the rest (originally posted 1/28/09)

"It's hard to gauge another man's needs. But after the first $30 billion or $40 billion, you'd think he could push back from the table..."

Dear friends,

There has been much fanfare, deservedly so, about Bernie Madoff, a person who is accused of bilking investors out of some $50 billion. On the link below, the incomparable Elmer Smith of the Philadelphia Daily News articulates this whole affair, as only he does. Enjoy!!!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20090116_Elmer_Smith__Madoff_deserves_respect_-_from_other_inmates_serving_life_terms.html
Read full post

MWS Journal -- Godfathers of Gangster Rap by Melvin Smith

"The argument is that titles like Get Rich or Die Trying will sell, but uplifting songs won’t. If that is so, why aren’t Stevie Wonder and Smokey Robinson broke?" - Rev. Barbara Reynolds

Dear friends,

The short, but brilliant, letter below was "copied" to me via e-mail by a comrade-in-the-struggle, as it were. His name is Melvin Smith. He is a serious brother with a long history in our centuries-old movement for equality, dignity, and justice. He has given me permission to share the letter with you.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
************************************
MWS Journal
22-Feb-2009

This is the comment that I tried, unsuccessfully, to post [inserted below] at the Seattle Medium (a part of Black Press USA network). Follow this link to the article in question: “Black Leaders Silent As Black Rappers Create Environ Of Death And Abuse”by Rev. Barbara Reynolds, NNPA Columnist, originally posted 2/19/2009

My comment:

This commentary by Barbara Reynolds, as usual, is a model of integrity and courage. I am inspired by her continued presence and unrelenting struggle in the increasingly compromised currents of American journalism.

Some apologists for the American status quo and some presumed defenders of African American dignity will probably claim her remarks here to be old hat and merely a rehashing of Bill Cosby's widely noted complaints about lifestyles of the Black poor, but the substance of Reynolds' charge is far deeper and greater. She reveals the core of the problem and blames "white" power appropriately, whereas Cosby (in his earliest tirades, at least) denied and ignored that aspect of our problem.

While the destructive effects of a sordid but "successful" rap music scene are evident nationwide, the toll is increasing internationally as well. Ms. Reynolds correctly identifies the underside of cultural imperialism in a nation founded and guided by "white" supremacy/privilege. Our attitude and active response to this particular form of attack should be to resist and repell it now. The bottom line is Black people's survival and redevelopment on this planet.


--MWS (aka Melmanjaro)
Read full post

Obama wins Sojourner Truth's vote (originally posted 9/18/08)

by Rev. Valda Jean Combs

The post-primary polling data out of Kentucky has been hitting us with the central message that race strongly factored into Senator Hillary Clinton's lopsided victory there. So now, as the race cards are spread right out there on the national table, I have a question: Does anyone still wonder why so many Black women are going for Senator Barack Obama?

Some of Clinton's backers, this campaign season, have tried to make a vote for their candidate seem like a vote for all women. Younger women drawn to Obama's message of change have demurred. So have peace activist women horrified by Clinton's vote to authorize the use of force in Iraq. Black women also have our own reasons— rooted in the history of this country and the two waves of women's rights activism—to make another choice. And, I'd like to talk about that. But first, let me make it plain that my support of Barack Obama is not a failure to understand the damage patriarchy has done to our community. Instead, it's an intentional embrace of a brother who eschews paternalism and who himself embraces community.

This contrasts with Bill and Hillary Clinton. Both have marginalized Obama at different times with statements such as: "He gives good speeches," "he's not electable," "he's another Jesse Jackson" and most recently "hard working whites support me." It's an encoded drumbeat that spreads the message that Obama is "not like us."

Rather than challenge racism, the Clintons have affirmed those for whom race is a barrier to supporting a Black Democratic nominee. In their quest for the White House, the Clintons have sacrificed the Black vote and the Black loyalty that helped to put Bill Clinton in office. We have a saying in my community: "It is a sorry child who forgets those who helped them along the way."

At the Ohio Women's Rights Convention in 1851, Sojourner Truth, an emancipated slave, posed a defiant question to white men and women when she asked, "Ain't I a woman?"

Sister Sojourner spoke out despite the pleas of white female suffragists who thought that demanding the vote for former slaves would doom their cause to failure. Sojourner felt then, as I do, what the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. called "the fierce urgency of now."

But, the dialogue she sought did not occur. Sojourner's place was to speak when she was asked, and to sit down and shut up when her agenda diverged from that of her suffragist sisters. Sister Sojourner experienced sexism, but it was racism that caused her children to be sold away and racism that forced her to plow the fields like a man.

When Black women press for inclusion, white women have historically been hard of hearing. As a result, far from viewing white women as partners in the struggle, women of color have the historical knowledge of white women in partnership with their men as oppressors.

Slavery left a sour taste in the mouths of Black women whose forebears suckled and nurtured white children while their own children were neglected or sold away. Slavery bred antipathy between the Black slave woman forced to endure rape at the hands of the white male slave owner and mistreatment at the hands of the white female slave owner. And, then there were the Black men lynched, murdered and prosecuted based on false accusations by white women.

While leading feminists often acknowledge this historical truth, this acknowledgement did not equal inclusion. Women of color fought alongside white feminists in the 1970s and 1980s, but found our perspective elbowed aside; our loyalty taken for granted.

Feminism's almost exclusive focus on the worth of woman's work outside the home was a non-issue for Black women who worked inside and outside the home and whose work was devalued in both realms.

But, when we raised the problematic irony of women of color working outside their own homes in the homes of white women—where they were paid low wages with no benefits—this was often lost on white feminists. They seemed more riveted on breaking down the gender barriers to elite schools and high-paying professions.

Feminism could not, or would not, grasp the loyalty of Black women to a patriarchal church that has marginalized and sometimes oppressed us; our insistence that we will not leave our men behind; and a moral vision, borne out of oppression, that seeks a just society for all humanity, with equal opportunities and rights for all groups. Ain't I a woman?"

Out of that demand grew the movement we call "womanism," a term that Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Alice Walker coined in the introduction to her 1983 book, In Search of Our Mothers' Gardens: Womanist Prose.

Womanism recognizes that—at least for now—only Black women can articulate the complex nature of our history, our theology, our community, our voice and the fierce power of our love.

Implicit in that love is the embrace of church, family and women, but also our men. For women who experience oppression more intensely, we require a more intense liberation movement.

Finally, while feminism places priority on women, womanism places priority on the collective whole. While feminism speaks to sexism, womanism speaks to sexism, racism, classism and ethnocentrism. As an end note to her definition of womanism, Walker writes, "Womanist is to feminist as purple is to lavender," an acknowledgement that womanism expands the parameters of white feminism to include issues important to women of color and women in poverty.

My support for Obama is a repudiation of the politics that have reigned supreme since Sojourner Truth, a politics that says my dream must wait until someone else's has been realized.

Obama stands for the proposition that we can go forward together, as one. This is what my 94-year-old grandmother and her 84-year-old sister have prayed for, stood for and hoped for. The fierce urgency of now is up against the fierce arrogance of now.

Black women supporting Obama now dare to believe that change can come in our time. A change that offers our boys hope that they, too, can become president; a change that offers our community hope that Black families can survive and thrive; and change that says out of oppression can come liberation for not just some of us, but all of us. If we have learned anything from Sister Sojourner, it is that we must speak now, for we are women too.

Permission to reprint this article was given by Valda Jean Combs and Womens enews.

Valda Jean Combs is a pastor in the United Methodist Church, an ordained Baptist minister and licensed attorney. Combs heads Full Proof HIV Ministry, an organization that educates, raises awareness and combats stigma associated with HIV/AIDS in faith institutions.

"valda combs" help@valdacombsjd.com
Contact for Women's enews: Sandy Spady 135 W 29th St. Ste. 1005 New York, NY 10001 212 244-1720 phone212-244-2320 fax244-1720 phone 212-244-2320 http://www.womensenews.org/
Read full post

"Auto" Bailouts ignore the inner powers of working people (originally posted 12/17/08)

Instead of camping out on the Hill, maybe Messrs. Chrysler, Ford and GM should seek advice from some of the women at Home Care Associates, who have found a way to bail themselves out while also investing in themselves. ..

Dear friends,

The story on the link below is an absolutely beautiful one - in all ways. It was penned by Annette John-Hall of the Philadelphia Inquirer. Her work has graced this blog on several occasions. Enjoy!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/columnists/annette_john-hall/20081207_Annette_John-Hall__While_helping_others__investing_in_themselves.html?adString=inq.news/annette_john-hall;!category=annette_john-hall;&randomOrd=121208084221
Read full post

Should "Global warming"and "Gay marriage"be real concerns?

"More than 70 kids and their parents filed a class-action lawsuit today against two Luzerne County judges who detained thousands of teens in juvenile detention centers from which they received more than $2 million in payments. "

Dear friends,

Please look at the two links below. President Obama and his colleagues may be missing the point. That is, at least to me, it seems that there are larger concerns about what is going on in this nation other than getting money to (i.e., subsidizing) big banks and corporations under what is euphemistically called the "Federal Stimulus Plan".

G. Djata Bumpus

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/40353522.html


http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/20090310_Former_Bucks_prosecutor_sentenced_for_corrupting_teens.html
Read full post

About Chris Brown and Domestic Violence, from a boxer's perspective

“If someone loves you, then the only response that s/he has when angry with you is to simply cut off communication. In other words, s/he does not speak either to or with you. The thought of violence from either side, is never an issue... if someone initiates violence towards you, regardless of their relationship to you, whatever you thought your relationship was, you were wrong – and you better make that person be the one who screams for the cops.”

Dear friends,

Back in the Fall of 1997, I attended a conference at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, that was focused on the effects of the, at the time, newly-legislated welfare reform on domestic violence. In other words, the main concern was: Would women stay in an abusive relationship, since they would no longer be able to get help (welfare) for their children. In order to contribute to the dialogue, I delivered a short paper there that was based upon my experience as a boxer.

The main point of my thesis was, and still is: Batterers are weak men who delude themselves into thinking that they are champion boxers, for a moment, when dealing with females. For instance, when a boxer confronts an opponent, that fighter does not just say to himself or herself, "I'm gonna knock this person out." Rather, s/he is thinking, "All right, I'm gonna move side-to-side, then jab to the belly, and come up and jab to the head." Or, “I’m gonna weave under the jab (of the opponent), then come up and hit him/her with a left hook on the chin.

Boxing is about "controlled fear". Both fighters are aware of their possible defeat, so they come out with their hands up, in order to protect themselves. They never come out with their hands by their sides (i.e., down). It's all about control.

Moreover, as the rounds go on, each fighter is trying to gain control of the space (i.e., the ring), so that the opponent can be more easily controlled. If the fighter is more of a “runner” like, say, Muhammad Ali or his daughter Laila, then, in order to control the space, one must be a slugger or “banger”, like Joe Frazier or his daughter Jackie and “cut off the ring” (i.e., get the person against the ropes), if success is the intention. So, in boxing we say, “You fight a boxer and box a fighter.”.

Otherwise, if not “cut off”, the runner will dance around and dart in and out, landing punches. Either way, each boxer must be patient, in the face of danger, and use a variety of techniques in the attempt to attain control.

Likewise, the man who normally seems like such a nice guy, and who, in fact, seems like the most unlikely person to be a batterer, suddenly, sees himself as a boxer. In other words, in a dispute with a female, he finds himself in a situation where he feels that he can "control" the situation with violence, if nothing else is working. After all, usually, women are not socialized to "hit" much less hit back.

So this normally “nice” guy, suddenly, in his own mind, turns into Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier, or Mike Tyson for that matter. Just as the boxer thinks about the next move by saying, “I’m gonna hit the chin with a right cross and come back with a left hook.”, the batterer, either standing, or in the case of Chris Brown sitting with whatever kind of look on the face, says to himself, “If she says that again, I’m gonna knock her upside her head.” In other words, he feels that he is in "control", like a boxer is against an opponent. To be sure, that same guy (batterer) would never think of doing that with another male (unless the guy was half his size and had a docile personality). But at this moment, he is “in control”.

So Chris Brown is a loathsome coward. Can he change? We should hope so. However, he should do that with someone other than Rihanna, the young girl who comes from the land of my grandparents. The fact that he has so quickly resorted to another form of control to “win” her back is both pathetic and sad on Rihanna’s part, but that pitiful fact is also true of all of her male relatives and so-called “friends” who have allowed Brown to be able to walk around without crutches still.

In any case, he should, at least, be tried for “obstruction of justice”, since it is unlikely that she will testify against him now, since he has, deliberately, conned her into keeping him out of the slammer, by getting her to “reconcile”.

Finally, as I teach and have taught each of my students (some 2600 - with over 500 of them female) and have been doing so for a living, since 1988, “If someone loves you, then the only response that s/he has when angry with you is to simply cut off communication. In other words, s/he does not speak either to or with you. The thought of violence from either side, is never an issue. However, if someone initiates violence towards you, regardless of their relationship to you, whatever you thought your relationship was, you were wrong – and you better make that person be the one who screams for the cops.” Dig? That is what I taught my son and both daughters (the youngest has sparred with Jackie Frazier), starting all three - now adults - on each of their second birthdays.

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Is the GOP's Michael Steele really a Devil?

Tall and handsome, Steele had a full head of hair back then. He also had a nice singing voice and was light on his feet, as he sang with an evil sneer, "the hopes that were dashed, when the stock market crashed, ha, ha, ha, ha, those were the good old days."






Dear friends,

I am not sure of what I was thinking,. when the Republican Party chose an African American male named Michael Steele to be their point man. I thought that he would be a formidable opponent to the Democratic Party. Yet, at least to me, it seems that, unless he makes a complete turnaround, he is going to be an embarrassment to everyone. After all, upon his recent criticism of Rush Limbaugh, a premier hypocrite, Steele backed down from Loudmouth Limbaugh, after having originally lambasted the fraud.

At any rate, on the link below, a dear friend of mine, Jenice Armstrong of the Philadelphia Daily News, whose work has appeared on this blog, a number of times, has a more personal appreciation for Steele.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/features/20090305_Jenice_Armstrong__New_play_for_GOP_s_Steele.html
Read full post

In Honor of Women's History Month

"ONLY A FOOL WALKS OUT OF THE HOUSE WITH HALF OF HIS BRAIN" (pun intended)

Dear friends,

For the remainder of the month of March, this blog will feature female authors, in most of the pieces. Many of the articles and columns have appeared at an earlier time here. Moreover, at least to me, it is interesting that what men see as equality for themselves is actually not equality at all, when it comes to what they view as equality for women. Unfortunately, sexism's other half, i.e., female self-hatred, has many women seeing their equality as whatever men see fit. This must end! Period.

Finally, sexism is a bigger problem in our society and all others throughout the world than racism, for example. The reason is: It affects more people than, say, racism. Additionally, it is not simply a matter of "equal pay or equal work". To be sure, many men suffer that injustice too. What makes sexism so unjust and, in fact, inhuman, is that, just as racism, it does not allow the insulted ones to be fully human. It is time for all men to wake up and stop defending this atrocity. It is senseless! After all, since women make up half of the human population, then that means that they also own half of the total intellectual and physical power. Therefore, it seems to me that it would benefit humanity - all around, if men stop hiding behind the insecurities that make sexism proliferate. Besides, if you think about it: Only a fool walks out of his house with half of his brain (pun intended).

Peace,
G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

With help from one of my two daughters, a Thanksgiving Father's message to Male Youth #12 [Raising your daughter(s), Pt. 3] - first posted 11/25/08

In light of the recent Sarah Palin spectacle, how can you teach your daughter that she is equal to everyone else in capabilities, based upon the reality that everyone has both strengths and weaknesses?



Dr. Namandje Ne'fertiti Bumpus
*****************************************
Hey young brothers,

In light of the recent Sarah Palin spectacle, how can you teach your daughter that she is equal to everyone else in capabilities, based upon the reality that everyone has both strengths and weaknesses?

The first thing that you have to do is start teaching her to be comfortable with making judgments and decisions. As human beings, we are always making judgments, just to walk up a flight of stairs, or put the "right" amount of food on a fork, for that matter. Ours is a sexist society that deliberately has its institutions set up to make girls and women feel inferior, so that men can have a false sense of superiority and, thus, hide their insecurities. Yet, those inner fears of males have a great deal to do with murder, lecherous greed, and other insults that people impose on one another that are so rampant in human civilization.

Therefore, as her father, you must give your daughter(s) the space to take chances and make judgments on her own, instead of doing everything for her or babying her. These days, there are many activities, including various games and sports that she can play and, simultaneously gain confidence in her ability to make good choices.

What happens far too often, unfortunately, is: Many men tend to pamper their daughters to the point where the latter feel insecure about decision-making, because their “Daddy” always takes care of everything. By her teenage years, she meets some knucklehead who is trying to impress her by “taking charge – and care - of her”. The girl becomes comfortable with that, because she learned that a little whining or whatever she did to manipulate her father gets her whatever it is that she wants. Then, for whatever reason, the boy does not deliver. Or, even worse, gets her involved in something that alters the direction of her life. Before long, she begins to feel that every time she makes a decision, it is the “wrong” one. Next comes the depresson, distrust for others, alcohol, pills and other drugs, as she tries to run from herself. Meanwhile, she continues to find herself in relationships where someone else makes the decisions (e.g., spending money)for her.

The other day, during a phone conversation with my/our middle child (now adult) and oldest daughter who is a medical scientist, she mentioned that even while doing sports, many young girls are afraid to take chances. She gave an example about having to deal with that when she coached a young girl's basketball team a few years back, and how the boys would dive after the loose ball, but the girls (often having been told to not "scrape up" their knees by their mothers) would just let the ball roll right by them. I asked her to write it down, and this is what she had to say, below:

The point I was making was not about them not wanting to scrape their knees. I don't think they even thought that far ahead because it was such a programmed response, and it has nothing to do with that. It is so much bigger than that, and to say that they didn't dive for simple fear of scraping their knees is much like saying (as you always taught me) that celebrating Black History Month is only about noting the accomplishments and inventions of individuals.

It is a minor thread of an intricately woven fabric. It has to do with creating this distinct line between how girls (women) and how boys (men) are supposed to act with respect to their roles in society. It is complete nonsense. To say that a man should be paying for something because he is male and it is his job is to accept that women should also play into the role of being less capable.

Gender is much different than sex and we have to eliminate it. Sex is, of course, biologically relevant but gender roles are social constructions that are completely out-dated. We cannot be okay with getting rid of some and not getting rid of others. Instead of this idea of what a "man" is or a "woman" is, which means nothing, we all need to be viewed simply as human beings with the ability and responsibilty to contribute equally to society.

Particular interactions and relationships, therefore, must be governed by principles. They should not be connected by gender-related expectations. For instance , equal pay for equal work and the acknowledgment that decisions regarding monetary contributions to the household should be based on financial health and strength and not gender. There are obvious biological differences between males and females. Certainly, males and females are not the same. However, those differences have no bearing on my ability or responsibility with regard to paying a mortgage, dinner bill or engaging in service to my community and society.

Those are my thoughts, basically; you have heard it before.

Thanks, Dr. Bumpus. Enough said.

Well baby brothers, we will talk about all of the above more, next time. Cool? Peace.

G. Djata Bumpus

Read full post

Black Doctor Website

"BlackDoctor.org) -- When the oil in your car is low, the oil light comes one. When there is something wrong with your engine, the engine light comes on. When there is something wrong with your body, a light doesn’t pop on, but your body usually sends out a flare when something has gone amuck..."


Dear friends,

On the link below you wil find an extraoirdinary Website that delivers a free newsletter about health - at least once per week. All adults can benefit from occasionally perusing it.

One Love,
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.blackdoctor.org/articles.aspx?counter=33989
Read full post

The GOP has an uphill battle courting African Americans

"Although Lincoln gets credit for freeing the slaves, he was more interested in saving the Union than in making sure African Americans were treated fairly..."


Dear friends,

The recent appointment of Michael Steele, an African American, as chairman of the Republican Party represents the acknowledgement of the fact that the African American vote cannot be taken for granted as it has been by the GOP since the Sixties.

On the link below, in his usual brilliant fashion, veteran columnist George Curry who is now with the Philadelphia Inquirer takes us on an historical tour of the relationship between Blacks and the GOP, from Lincoln until today.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/columnists/george_curry/20090219_Beyond_the_Spin__How_the_GOP_lost_blacks.html
Read full post

Humor - What if President Obama's familial roots were Nigerian instead of Kenyan?

"We have much reason to be thankful that President Obama is not of Nigerian origin..."





Dear friends,

As my longtime dear friend and brother, Nigerian educator, scholar and author Okey Ndibe has insisted, “Africa has been portrayed as a continent of losers. Who wants to be associated with losers?”.

Consequently, one of the most symbolic victories for those of us who have spent so much of our energies contributing to the struggle, over the past several centuries, to win the minds of African people here in the Diaspora - as well as those on the Mother continent - has been the election of a person to the presidency of the United States of America who has an African name. Many more African Americans will now not be so ashamed of being associated with Africa.

After all, as has been pointed out on this blog in the past, the great Marcus Garvey reminded us that, “"This propaganda of dis-associating Western Negroes from Africa is not a new one. For many years white propagandists have been printing tons of literature to impress scattered Ethiopia, especially that portion within their civilization, with the idea that Africa is a despised place, inhabited by savages, and cannibals, where no civilized human being should go, especially black civilized human beings." (Philosophy & Opinions of Marcus Garvey, edited by Amy Jacques-Garvey)

And so the other half of what we call racism - that is, the systematic oppression and exploitation of, particularly African American people in this country – in its historical context, has been what I call programmatic self-hatred. Moreover, this “other half” of racism, that is, self-hatred, unfortunately, is displayed by African Americans in a wide range of situations. For example, it is evident when some of our folks will not acknowledge their African American fellows on the streets (by either looking downwards or turning their heads) - to drive-by shootings in ghettos. As well, through our government- and corporate-controlled media, Black self-hatred is showcased daily through popular “comedy” television shows and movies, along with the equal buffoonery of “Black” plays in theatre houses all across America, all of which provide themes that allow us to either laugh at ourselves, or, in the case of many Black “dramas”, have European American (i.e., white) folks feeling sorry for us.

But racist self-hatred runs through the blood of all non-European peoples these days. That makes sense, since just as in other forms of oppression like sexism, for instance, the oppressed must necessarily internalize their oppression, in order for the injustice to proliferate. Otherwise, the oppressors would have to constantly spend their time killing and engaging in other abuses, in an attempt to get the latter to conform. To be sure, in that kind of scenario, the rulers would be unable to get their victims to do much work, much less make profits for them.

Finally, on the link below is a beautiful and humorous piece from a new online news service called the "Nigerian Village Square". With all of the corruption and internecine warfare that seems to be so endemic to most of the domains of the continent (i.e., Africa), let us hope that those of us in the Diaspora, someday soon, emotionally, spiritually, and practically re-unite with our people on the continent, and embrace Africa’s return to the prosperity She once knew. As well, let us hope that one day the continent will be called the United States of Africa.

One Love, One Heart, One Spirit,
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/articles/sheyi-oriade/thank-god-obama-is-not-of-nigerian-o.html

Read full post

Obama's "State of the Nation" address ignores reality

"...President Obama’s current solution is to give the big banks money, if they need it."


Dear friends,

Now that President Obama’s Stimulus Plan is in force the obvious question is: Will it work? In a previous post I insisted that it would not. However, I waited until its passage to elaborate more on why it cannot possibly do anything but repeat what has been happening ever since 1873.

As I mentioned in the earlier post, President Obama is going to put lots of money into the hands of big banks and very large companies. He is not sending out money to individuals, as George Bush did. Rather, Obama is giving the money to the parties to whom he feels beholden - directly. There is no pretense.

Nevertheless, the main problem is: Ever since the end of the Civil War, big banks began to take on a new role. That is, they started loaning money to large companies, so that the latter could maintain operational costs like wages and inventory, with the intention of the former receiving payment that included interest from the latter in the near future. Also, banks started lending money for investments like new industrial facilities. Such practices re-defined the way that businesses work, since now, instead of worrying about gaining capital based upon performance (known as industrial capital), large companies could appeal to banks to “watch their backs”, as it were. This kind of capital is called finance capital. Unfortunately, it (finance capital) also allowed certain companies to be able to monopolize entire industries. So much for “free enterprise”.

To be sure, during the late-19th Century, all of this made a lot of sense, because ships (also financed by the banks and insured by the giant insurance institutions) were being sent to places like Ireland, Poland, and Italy in order to bring people here to work in all of the factories that finance capital was allowing to be developed. Of course, it is interesting that such “affirmative action” was used that way. After all, millions of African Americans, former captive workers (so-called slaves) were already here languishing on Southern plantations as “sharecroppers” (a situation that didn’t end until around 1965).

In any case, the dilemma which occurred then, as well as now is: The banks were stretching their coffers to the point of insolvency, since, if one of the large companies mentioned above did not procure the amount of revenues that had been expected, then that enterprise would not be timely with repayment. Meanwhile, workers would have to be laid off and, consequently, production slowed, so that money could be freed up to go towards paying the banks. Of course, the companies do not always give the aforementioned money to the banks, for whatever reasons.

So President Obama’s current solution is to give the big banks money, if they need it. Wow! How “neat”. Presumably, they will then be able to “help” either new or current clients (i.e., companies). Additionally, he will give money to specially-chosen large corporations. The question then becomes: How will President Obama deal with the next inevitable “economic/financial disaster” cycle? Will he simply print up more money, at our expense, and pass it out to the same parties? Or, will he show leadership and courage, allowing citizens, instead of the market, to make our own course? Perhaps, that is why he has not made a peep about getting rid of either The Patriot Act or The Homeland Security Department. Let’s face it. It seems like the government would not want folks getting any crazy ideas like wanting to determine their own destinies. Eh?

One Love,
G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

New Health Care Initiative? How about Racism and Medicine?

"By 1938, the situation had grown so dire that Dr. Louis T. Wright of Harlem Hospital declared, “The A.M.A. has demonstrated as much interest in the health of the Negro as Hitler has in the health of the Jew.”




Dear friends,

The piece on the link below came out last year. However, I deliberately waited to post the link to it on this blog until President Obama was in office. Our health care system suffers from far more than simply how the businesses that run the aforementioned system get paid. Moreover, aside from the fact that mental health is not covered in the same context as its physical counterpart, when, at least, as much of both our personal and social maladies emanate from our mentally unhealthy society, the persistence of racism in the way that many are cared for - and by whom, should be addressed. Is that a problem for an African American president? If so, why?

One Love,
G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/29/health/views/29essa.html?ex=1218254400&en=86180c2260b5574c&ei=5070&emc=eta1
Read full post

Videos of Malcolm, Martin, and James

"Considering the recent cartoon rhat was deliberately posted during Black History Month by the New York Post, the series of videos here seem quite timely..."

Dear friends,

Considering the fact that America is still wrought with economic and social problems, regardless of the president's skin color, is Black Nationalism still an answer to the woes of Black people? Below is a link with videos of and about Malcolm X, including interviews with Dr. Martin Luther King and James Baldwin.

One Love,
G. Djata Bumpus
Videos of and about Malcolm X, including interviews with Dr. Martin Luther King and James Baldwin
Read full post

For Whom is Obama's Economic Plan? (originally posted Jan. 10, 2009)

"We know that 'Power corrupts.' Playing “sleight of hand” tricks and performing intellectual acrobatics, through tax cuts, with the “fruits” of citizens’ labor is simply more of the same..."

Dear friends,

Will President Obama's “make-work”/economic plan effort be much better than the ineffective welfare-to-work schemes that have popped up all over the country, during the past two decades? Why do we need a federal, centralized bureaucracy to manage our economic affairs anyway? And who is going to be building roads and bridges, Mr. Obama? That is hard and dangerous work. How will responsibilities be distributed? In securing work, what opportunities will African American males, much less other males who also look like you, as well as all female workers, have? Moreover, will not all of those laborers involved need to be fairly young?

In order to attract a large amount of young people, Mr. Obama will have to convince them that the work itself, not the paycheck, is the reward. Yet, in our possession-oriented, market-driven culture, young people have no interest in doing hard labor. Besides, these days, the paycheck means more to them than having done the job well.

To be sure, the idea of appreciating our own ability to work has been one that has often escaped youth throughout human history. After all, it is hard as a young person to hear that the satisfaction of a job well done is its own reward, when he or she sees the inequities of the distribution of the harvesting of the "fruits" of labor all around us - from bankers to businesspeople to politicians and many others. “Work is the reward!” is one of those notions that would be fine if everyone believed it, but hard to swallow when you know others are getting away with doing so little. Hence, it is the unfairness that eats away at our resolve to do our best in society.

Still, President Obama must push forward in getting our youth to appreciate work. That will require leadership. Unfortunately, about this notion of work being the reward, as mentioned above, I have not heard one peep from the mouth of either our incoming president or the one going out, or the guy before that one. There is no leadership.

Rather, the only sense of urgency that President Obama seems to have is how quickly he can get some money into the hands of the big banks and companies. After all, who but big banks and companies will really be benefiting from this make-work venture that Mr. Obama is passing off as his "Economic Plan"? Heck, Halliburton will leave Iraq. Their contractors will make the money here, with less chance of losing their lives. Also, with Obama’s “make-work” enterprise, people will be able to buy DVDs and other electronic goods from the big national chain stores. They will be able to buy designer clothes from the national clothing chains, and so forth. The economy will be doing great! Right?

Thus far, we have only been considering blue collar workers. But what will become of the millions of laid-off office and white collar workers? How many will want to build bridges and roads? How many have the physical strength or emotional will to do so? How will a person who has been an account executive for the past fifteen years experience economic progress by doing “make-work” jobs to feed the family? Is that not a huge loss in his or her standard of living, by itself?

In another area of economic concern, instead of “Bail-outs” for incompetent executives and their gullible investors, how about the United Auto Workers themselves taking over the Big Three, in a similar context as the Avis workers did back in the 90s. To be sure, the former employees-now employers will not mind pay or other benefit cuts, because they will be developing an enterprise that belongs to them. As well, that particular union, UAW, with its, historically, suspect leadership, will, in effect, dissolve itself, since with the workers as the owners, they will not need anyone to represent them other than themselves. Currently, of course, like all workers, they need a union, because the employer and employees do not have the same interests. In other words, it is not in the interests of employers to represent the interests of the workers. If they did, then there would never be disputes or strikes, much less lay-offs and benefit cuts. Most importantly, if the workers take over the companies, it will be Americans making better cars for themselves/us and we will buy their products from them, because it will actually benefit all of us.

Ultimately, all capable people will have to discover the divine powers within themselves that will make them both creative and productive. As a matter of fact, at least to me, the best results of strong economic development are revealed by humans being able to spend their leisure time engaging in both personal and group interactions where one’s relatedness to himself or herself - and others – as opposed to the trinkets and baubles that one possesses – allows each citizen to cooperatively co-exist with his or her fellows in peace. It will require a leader who has wisdom, experience, and courage to guide the citizenry in that direction. Re-doing Bill Clinton’s administration will, predictably, "lead" us right back to where we are. Considering the make-up of Obama’s Cabinet as it now stands (of mostly Clinton people), and for all of the present hoopla about the “inauguration”, this is all sad – if not pathetic.

We know that “Power corrupts.” Playing “sleight of hand” tricks and performing intellectual acrobatics, through tax cuts, with the “fruits” of citizens’ labor is simply more of the same. Consequently, Americans need to scrap the kleptomaniacs who make up our federal government officials and Obama needs to “change” his current course, by becoming a leader who guides the American people in a way that helps us create our own industries, and build our own self-sufficient, loving, and, therefore, prosperous communities.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

The Federal Bailout - a panoply of illusions (originally posted 12/11/08)

Teacher: Consider, oh child, whence these talents?
You cannot have them from yourself.
Child: Well, I have everything from Papa.
Teacher: And he, from whom does he have them?
Child: From Grandpa.
Teacher: Now look! From whom did Grandpa get them?
Child: He took 'em.
(Johann Von Goethe from "Katechisation")

Dear friends,

At the heart of the present world crisis in both banking and business is the illusion that value is something outside of what is socially accepted as such. Here, of course, I am defining an illusion (which should not be confused with the medical term “delusion”) within the Freudian context as: An idea or belief that is based upon wishful thinking that has no relation to reality, and does not admit to needing such a connection.

Nevertheless, roughly two and one-half centuries ago, Italian political economist Fernando Galiani insisted that “Value is a social relation.” For example, if you fill a room with either gold bullion or billions of dollars in cash, neither has any value, unless, at least, two human beings engage themselves with either of the aforementioned items during a process of the exchange.

In other words, the value of any particular object or activity (i.e., commodity) is solely based upon imaginary notions of “value” that are concocted by buyers and sellers alike during commercial transactions. After all, as a dear friend of mine, Denny Wolfe, says: Other than the three elements that we call oxygen, hydrogen, and carbon, which in combination provide sustainable life to both fauna and flora, no substances or objects on Earth have intrinsic “value” for us.

On a more tangible level, for humans, it is food that is the most significant matter that has intrinsic value. Consequently, in his classic book called "The Principles of Black Political Economy", Professor Lloyd Hogan insists that food, which he also calls the “elixir of life”, is "wealth in the abstract".

All people, regardless of either income or social status, must eat in periodic intervals or surely we will succumb. Period. Moreover, unless we are farmers, we must acquire our food by exchanging something for it that is useful to the seller of food. The item of exchange must not only be of use to the seller of the food, but it also must be of use to the seller of whatever the food-seller needs other than food - since it is presumed that this food-seller already has enough food and is merely selling surplus product(s) in order to acquire other things.

Hence, a universal item of exchange is needed. That is, an object or substance must be agreed upon that represents value in the abstract. Food is perishable; therefore, it has to be something that can withstand time. Gold once served that purpose, meaning all commodities shared the same quality in relation to gold, only quantitative factors, regarding how much gold any particular commodity represents was the issue.

And so, this is where money – like Dorothy in Oz - appears in the marketplace. In other words, it is not something "inevitable"; rather, it is pure chance. This is particularly so, because at the point of exchange, the food-seller mentioned above simultaneously alienates himself or herself from his or her ward (food commodity) and transforms it into that universal exchange value (money). At this point of metamorphosis, even the outward appearances disappear, only quantitative factors distinguish the values of commodities. That is precisely why any phenomenon can serve as money (e.g., paper, gold, plastic cards, and so forth).

This also explains why the Federal Reserve System can create money, like gangsters in a cellar, regardless of whether or not the aforementioned currency has any value to it outside of its name. But the more money that you "make", the less valuable existing money becomes. That means that the value of the money is inflated. Most people think of "inflation" in terms of "price". However, a higher price is only the affect that inflating the economy with more dollars has on the representative value of any given commodity. As a matter of fact, ultimately, it is military puissance that determines the validity and value of money. It is sad to say.

Knowing this, nevertheless, a handful of unscrupulous billionaires met on Jekyll Island (Georgia) in 1913 and formed the Federal Reserve System. However, they could not do it by themselves, so they got some seedy politicians to support their endeavor. In the wake of industrial capital being replaced by finance capital (banks fronting money to businesses in lieu of the expected future earnings of the latter), this was the grand opportunity to make sure that overall competition in US banking - and industry - was almost non-existent.

To be sure, it also allowed big banks and companies to determine the progress of the economy based upon their profit margins. That is why whenever we hear that the "economy" is doing bad, it simply means that the profit margins of the aforementioned large enterprises are not as favorable as their owners/managers wish them to be. The labor of everyday people makes the economy, after all. Therefore, as long as folks are healthy, how can the economy be bad?

One of the difficulties in maintaining a healthy economy is: There is no "free" market in the United States. Instead, combines, monopolies, cartels, and other such organizational forms eschew competition. Yet, free competition presupposes free trade. Free trade presupposes a free market. So about what is all of this talk of “free” enterprise that gets bandied about so much in this country through the opinion-making, government- and corporate-controlled mass communications media?

Moreover, today, both our federal government and the corporate media promote the word capitalism as a concept that can be used interchangeably with terms like freedom, democracy, or the magical phrase "market economy." Due to the illusions of politicians, businesspeople, and the overall citizenry, the idea of capitalism as "eternal" is popular as well.

“...the notion of ‘obedience’ to the ‘natural laws’ of a free-market economy has been represented not as reflecting solely the dictates of prudence and the calculus of self-interest, but rather as possessing far loftier ethical overtones. In times of economic crisis this residual naturalism inhibited business and political leaders from ‘interfering’ with the supposedly unalterable laws of the market: its principles were thought to be ordained by nature rather than by men, and men believed that to violate them was to court social disaster. Only the severe breakdown during the Great Depression effectively destroyed this archaic naturalism and prepared the way for the widespread acceptance of a managed capitalist economy in which market mechanisms are assiduously manipulated through the offices of government." - The Domination Of Nature, by William Leiss

Currently, we are in a similar situation as the Great Depression economically. However, the general population is exponentially more educated (only about 3 out of 8 people even finished high school, in those days). Presumably, one would then think that that means either power or wealth will have to be relinquished by the government, banks and corporations, in order to maintain their legitimacy. Yet, that does not seem to be the case.

Please remember, that the whole purpose of the original North American venture by the British ruling class was to extract as much wealth as they could from the land and animals (both human and non-human), for the good of their class - not their so-called "race" (another illusion).

Nevertheless, beginning with the complete falsehood about “Pilgrims” coming to this land in order to be able to express their religious beliefs more freely, while, for generations, their alleged descendants fought “Indians” over “un-inhabited” territory, North Americans have lived under the illusion that the United States was always the United States, it just had another name.

Still it has been up to those in power to remain so. As Professor Hogan explains, "It must be emphasized that Wealth Accumulation is not done in the abstract. Indeed, it must be carried out by the exercise of the conscious will of people acting in the role of wealth accumulators. These wealth owners have the onus of preserving the form of their wealth while, at the same time, striving to increase its magnitude. Just as important, is the necessity for continuous control over the Wealth Accumulation Process by the wealth owners”. (Hogan, ibid.)

But the “Bailout” is using taxpayers’ money, we are told. "Taxpayers' money?", I ask. It is taxpayers’ sweat and blood! It is an illusion to either think or believe that a great deal of the money that the federal government absconds from us under penalty of law goes towards the commonweal. Besides, does all of this mean that the big banks and companies are saving their own money, while they waste ours? Well, perhaps, that just means that, as Professor Hogan has insisted, they are simply doing what they are supposed to do, that is, protect their wealth.

Finally, at least to me, the biggest problem with any illusion is: It can neither be proven nor disproven. This is especially true, because, occasionally, illusions are realized. For example, state lottery games and gambling casinos proliferate, because so many people are willing to embrace their illusions of acquiring great wealth and prosperity, at almost any cost. Yet, there are people who actually “hit”, now ad then. The banks and corporations, along with their servants in the US Congress are certainly hoping for that to be the case with the "Bailout". Therefore, it is an outright lie for Krugman, Wolfson, Bernanke, or any of the other apologists to suggest that any of this is about either logic or reason, much less that it makes sense. In any case, it will not work.

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Swimming in a sea of leaves

"Instead of forcing him from his pedestal, Phelps' recreational use of marijuana will no doubt push the pendulum further along the road to liberalization of pot laws..."

Dear friend,

In light of the decision by law enforcement authorities in South Carolina not to press charges against mega-champion Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps, it seems appropriate for me to share the thoughtful piece on the link below that was written by a longtime friend of mine who writes for the Philadelphia Daily News, Jill Porter. Her work has appeared on this blog in the past.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/columnists/jill_porter/20090204_Jill_Porter__Phelps_a_toke-ing_of_pot_legalizers__affection.html
Read full post

A real Valentine's Day story of love

"On Valentine’s Day, while retailers and consumers engage in an orgy of exchange, as they do at Christmastime, the intention for people to celebrate “love” relationships is what is viewed as the holiday’s most significant purpose..."

Dear friends,

On Valentine’s Day, while retailers and consumers engage in an orgy of exchange, as they do at Christmastime, the intention for people to celebrate “love” relationships is what is viewed as the holiday’s most significant purpose. However, neither family nor friendship love is the focus. Rather, it is “erotic” love - that is, the excitement felt by two strangers, as everyone is (since no one really ever “knows” another), as they find relief from the “lonesomeness and separateness” that is so endemic to this experience called human life.

Unfortunately, at some point, as Erich Fromm points out in his classic book called The Art of Loving, “The two persons become well acquainted, their intimacy loses more and more of its miraculous character, until their antagonism, their disappointments, their mutual boredom kill whatever is left of the initial excitement. “

This, of course, happens when love is experienced as a “state of being” or mood. Both persons allow their “walls” to come down and reveal some part of themselves to the other person that is normally off limits to anyone else. However, in that state, such mutual passivity, ultimately, causes mood swings. Then the same two people who “fell” in love, now fall out of it.

This kind if love, that is, a “state of being”, serves well, in a possession-oriented, market-driven society such as ours. Both retailers and advertisers have a great time manipulating the moods of citizens/consumers by promoting “love” in this context, for the latter's purchase of any number of commodities. This is especially so, because the insatiable appetite of the market is maintained.

However, if people begin to practice love as an “act of being”, that is, if they show care and concern for, feel responsible towards, and try to understand their love interests, their work, their communities, and all with which they come into contact, then, perhaps, more lasting and substantive relationships will evolve for all of us.

At any rate, below is a short tale that was e-mailed to me, some time ago, by a very special friend who lives in New York City. It brought back memories for me as a child who was raised in the Civil Rights Movement of the early Sixties. It helped me recall the types of stories that we heard and the kind of songs that we sung. Moreover, at least to me, it represents a genuine love. Enjoy!

One Love, One Heart, One Spirit,
G. Djata Bumpus
*****************************************

A cruise ship was sailing on an ocean. It was packed with people and their cargo.

At some point, the ship's bottom hit a large object. The ship began sinking.

The water filled the ship so quickly that almost everyone aboard either drowned while still on board or as they tried to flee by swimming away from the vessel.

Two men, one bald-headed, the other - hairy and bearded, did survive, however. In fact, they were able to swim to a small island that was nearby.

The island was completely barren. There were no trees, plants, or animals - only sand and a few boulders here and there. Fortunately, the weather was nice, not too cold or hot.

The two men, now seemingly bound together, decided that the only thing that they could do is hope for some divine intervention.

They agreed that prayer was the answer. However, the bald man said, "I don't know whether or not we'll be saying the same type of prayers or asking for the same things...Why don't we just split the island in half and each of us can pray for himself?"

The bearded man went along with him.

A line was drawn in the sand. Each man stood on either side of it. Right away, each man dropped to his knees and began to pray.

The bald fellow prayed aloud for food. Lo and Behold! Out of nowhere, a banquet-size amount of food appeared in front of him.

The bald man looked over at the bearded man who was still praying and seemed to have added nothing to his situation.

The bald man then said to himself, "I don't know who he's praying to or what he's asking for, but he better learn how to pray like me, if he doesn't want to starve to death."

It was now getting late and the sky was darkening. The bald man decided that he'd try his luck again by praying for some shelter. So, once again, he got down on his knees and prayed. Well, what do ya know? A small shack appeared out of nowhere. The bald fellow jumped up and down, and ran towards the shack for a good night's sleep.

Just as he entered the doorway of his new abode, he looked over and saw that the bearded guy was still praying, but had nothing to show for it.

When he got up the next morning, the bald man went outside and saw the bearded man still kneeling down and praying. He yelled over to the bearded man, "Hey, what's the matter?...You don't know how to pray?"

The bearded man said nothing. He just kept praying.

The bald-headed guy was really beside himself with pride and confidence, by now. He decided that he would pray for a woman, because he was lonesome in his little shack.

Meanwhile, as fate would have it, as he prayed, another cruise ship had a wreck nearby. The only surviving passenger was a woman. She ended up on the island.

The excited bald man invited her in for food and gave her shelter. She gladly accepted.

However, after a few hours, they both began discussing the need to get off of the island and return to their previous lives.

The bald man now got down on his knees, for a fourth time, and prayed. However, nothing happened right away, like it had previously, so he and the woman went to sleep inside of the shack.

The next morning when they got up, looking outside, they saw that a boat was sitting right there on the shore, in front of them.

The bald-headed guy started dancing and jumping around, once again, to see that his prayers had been answered. "I'm going home!", he exclaimed.

The woman, although excited too, asked him whether or not they were going to take the bearded man with them. The bald guy responded, "Nope...Let him pray his way out of this by himself - like I did."

So, over to the boat the pair went. The bearded man was still on his knees praying.

Just as they reached the boat, the clouds darkened. There was thunder and lightening.

A deep voice from the sky roared, "Where are you going?..Are you going to leave the bearded man?"

The bald-headed guy looked up and replied. "He's been on his knees praying for almost three days and nothing has happened...Why should I help him?"

The deep voice responded, "Do you know what he's been praying for?"
Still looking towards the sky, the bald man said "No, I don't...What was he asking for?"

The voice told him: "He's been asking that all of your prayers be answered."
Read full post

Archie Shepp on Obama's "Race" speech (originally posted 6/8/08)

"Mr. Obama- Barack- is attempting to confront-and resolve -a dichotomy between his political oratory and the simple reality of being a Black man..."





Dear friends,

Soon after I sent him the text from Senator Obama's now famous speech on "race" that the candidate made, in Philadelphia last year, the following letter was e-mailed to me, by an old and dear friend (who is also my chief music mentor). He is more commonly known as a legendary leader in the musical idiom known as "jazz". In any case, with the generous permission of this elder, I am sharing the aforementioned letter with you. It appears below.
**************************************
Re: Obama's defining speech on "race" in America

Thank you Bro' Bumpus . Perhaps the question is "What Is an American"? Notwithstanding the fact that America is a continent not a country; moreover, that places like Arizona, California, and Texas used to be Mexico and now "Americans" wish to build a wall to keep out the former occupants.

Mr. Obama- Barack- is attempting to confront-and resolve -a dichotomy between his political oratory and the simple reality of being a Black man. He has even fessed up to enjoying a fiery lecture on a Sunday morning, (one worthy of - Jesse- I might add - or the lesser known"Pork Chop" Davis), and why not? The latter are telling our story and they "run it down".

Is it so difficult to be Black and still to admit that fact with all its implications? What would the American cultural landscape look like without the children of the Sorrow Songs, Armstrong, Bird, 'Trane, and "Duke", Mahalia, Nina , Marian Anderson, Paul Robeson? No other people did it-make music the way we do -dance the way we do. We don't have to apologize for being who we are, nor subtly- one might say -subserviently merge our identities with others- ashamed to acknowledge a rich and incomparably diverse history.

As you have yourself rightfully pointed out, we Black folks are proud because we have fought long and hard for freedom going all the way back to the time we were enslaved. Our experience has formed the basis for ensuing struggles- including the fight for women's rights. We don't have to become Americans. We were ready for full citizenship when we arrived in the 17th century. It was they who called themselves, 'Virginians', or Carolinians', who murdered their Black fellow citizens during the 19th century riots in New York. They were not ready for a united people of America.

When Ray Charles sings "God Bless America" I become an "American". It takes a Black man to sing that song, to understand its words. Black folks are as American as the soil along the Misssissippi delta. We built the cities of New Orleans, Charleston and Atlanta. We constructed the East Coast railroads and picked the cotton, which were responsible for the bourgeoning industry in the North.

We sing original folk songs like "John Henry" even 'til today, to commemorate our toil. Richard Wright, the great African American novelist who wrote the book "Black Boy" (very controversial for its time, but went on to become a literary success) indicates 10 subjects - that are taboo when a Black man speaks to a "white" man. The three that stick out in my mind are white women, politics, and race. White people can and should solve the problems that only they themselves can resolve -peacefully - we pray - for it is after all they who have created the chaos in which the world is mired.

Best Wishes,
Bro' AShepp

Editor's Note: Relating to what Brother Shepp has mentioned above, long ago, Dr. W.E.B. DuBois wrote: "The discovery of personal whiteness among the world's peoples is a very modern thing...The ancient world would have laughed at such a distinction...by emphasis and omission to make children believe that every great thought the world ever knew was a white man's thought, every great deed the world ever did was a white man’s deed..."darkies" are born beasts of burden...Such degrading of men by men is as old as man and the invention of no one race or people...It has been left, however, to Europe and to modern days to discover the eternal worldwide mark of meanness - color!". - "The Souls of White Folks"
Read full post

Patty Jackson says, "Go! This is a 'must see' exhibit!" )originally posted 1/15/09)

"Would America have been America without her Negro People?" - Dr. W.E.B. DuBois (1903)


Dear friends,

For the past two weeks, just as she did for ten months prior to the election of President Barack Obama, the legendary WDAS FM radio personality Patty Jackson of Philadelphia has been vigorously inviting folks to learn, understand, and, consequently, appreciate the historical experiences of African American people and how those experiences are enmeshed in the total social fabric of what makes American culture. Through the Tavis Smiley-sponsored touring museum called America I Am, we all can do just that. The exhibit will be housed in Philly through much of the Spring. Therefore, anyone who plans on travelling that way (Philly), over the next five months, can check it out. Please click on the link below to find out more.

G. Djata Bumpus
http://americaiam.org/

PS Please catch Patty on weekdays, from 10am to 3pm, at http://www.wdasfm.com/ Cheers!

Read full post

What's up with Etta James calling President Obama's ears big?

"...if Etta James is so caught up on Obama having big ears, then why did she marry a “white" man? To be sure, Bob James has big ears..."

Dear friends,

I normally do not bother with the stupidity of folks in the entertainment industry. However, recently Etta James, a popular singer of old, made a comment about President Obama that should be challenged. She made a disparaging remark about Obama's "big ears".

Actually, Etta James has a nerve, since she married a "white" man named Bob James - a great musician (James is his surname- not hers). The fact of the matter is: Obama's mother was "white". Europeans have larger ears than Africans. That's a physiological fact! The next time you have a chance, look at ANY European American's ears. They are bigger than those of African Americans. Period. It was a natural part of coming from a cold climate that they have large ears (to help deal with the cold). Black folks have small ears compared to "whites".

Moreover, due to the historical “mixing” between Africans and Europeans, there are some African Americans with larger ears than their European American counterparts. Therefore, if Etta James is so caught up on Obama having big ears, then why did she marry a “white" man? To be sure, Bob James has big ears, just as Africans have kinky hair. The kinky hair kept us from getting caught up in the large amounts of vegetation of warm climates.

At any rate, at least to me, Etta James chumped herself off, by saying something so stupid. She hates her Blackness. Beyonce merely represents a mirrored image of Etta's own self-hatred of being Black. That's her problem. Still, I'm proud of Beyonce. It's just unfortunate that neither she, Jay Z, or her parents know much about human physiology or their people.

One Love.,
G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Why do we need to know African American history, much less have a month to honor it?

"African American history is not a separate history; rather, it merely includes more people in the real story of Our country."

Dear friends,

James Baldwin wrote, "...when we speak of history, we are speaking only of how Europe saw - and sees - the world."

To be sure, the mere mention of anything that has to do with African American history often causes resentment among much of our citizenry. The reasons for this vary. For example, some people may feel that, when the historical experiences of African Americans are isolated and emphasized, the aforesaid folks are being excluded from the joy of celebrating and recognizing a past that seems to, at least, in part, belong to all Americans. Or, perhaps, the less informed view the aforementioned historical experiences of African American people as insignificant to the overall development of our communities and country. Finally, a few may even argue that distinguishing one cultural group, in this land, from others makes us appear to be a divided nation.

However, at least to me, the importance of acknowledging the contributions of African Americans to the prosperity of North America, generally, lies in the need for all of us to understand and appreciate the fact that human progress has only occurred due to the efforts of many different peoples. No one body of folks deserves credit for all human accomplishment to this date. Surely, no such group ever will.

Nevertheless, in a book written two generations ago called The Study of Man, author Ralph Linton summed it up best when addressing the question, "What is an American?" He wrote: Our solid American citizen awakens in a bed built on a pattern which originated in the Near East...throws back the covers made from cotton, domesticated in India...goes to the bathroom, whose fixtures are a mixture of European and American inventions, both of recent date...washes with soap invented by the ancient Gauls...Returning to the bedroom - puts on garments whose form originally derived from the skin clothing of the nomads of the Asiatic steppes, puts on shoes made from skins tanned by a process invented in ancient Egypt...Before going out for breakfast - glances Through the window, made of glass invented in Egypt...stops to buy a paper, paying for it with coins, an ancient Lydian invention...At the restaurant - (the) plate is made of a form of pottery invented in China...has coffee, an Abyssinian plant, with cream and sugar. Both the domesti-cation of cows and the idea of milking them originated in the Near East, while sugar was first made in India...finished eating - settles back to smoke, an American Indian habit...while smoking - reads the news of the day, imprinted in characters - invented in Germany...and, if - a good conservative citizen ,gives thanks to a Hebrew deity, in an Indo-European language, for being 100 percent American.

In other words, all peoples have played or are playing a role in this experience known as human civilization. Mprepver, the history of African peoples in the Americas (North, South and Central) is long and old. Yet, today, most people - regardless of either their ethnicity or culture - seem to think that our history here is much more recent.

This is largely due to a deliberate practice, especially by European American journalists and historians to "falsify by omitting" the existence and subsequent contributions of African Americans to the whole intellectual and cultural essence of the North American psyche and behavior. In addition, ever since some lost and confused men, led by one Christopher Columbus, were discovered by Early American Natives, on the shore of a Caribbean island, the rationalizations for almost everything that is relevant to human existence have largely reflected the interests of European rulers and their offshoots in North America.

As well, partly due to their controlling what information gets distributed, a dominance has resulted that has turned the Earth (and, in fact, the Universe) into the aforementioned rulers' empire. Consequently, Kwame Nkrumah's reflection regarding the influence of ruling classes on the majority of the population is quite appropriate for this discourse.

In explaining group or "class" interests, Dr. Nkrumah contended,"In societies where there are competing ideologies, it is still usual for one ideology to be dominant. This dominant ideology is that of the ruling group. Though the ideology is the key to the inward identity of its group, it is in intent solidarist. For an ideology does not seek merely to unite a section of the people; it seeks to unite the whole of society in which it finds itself. In its effect, it certainly reaches the whole society, when it is dominant. For, besides seeking to establish common attitudes and purposes for the society, the dominant ideology is that which in the light of circumstances decides what forms institutions shall take, and in what channels the common effort is to be directed." (see Nkrumah's Consciencism)

Oddly enough, however, judging by most of the existing "approaches" to studying historical periods, one would find it hard to draw the conclusions to which I have just referred. That is, under the pretense of sharing common goals, particularly, in creating what eventually became the United States of America, slave-trading rulers like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson sold African captives, along with temporarily enslaved colonists, of largely British descent, called "indentured servants", the idea that the aforesaid rulers' interests were consistent with those of everyone else living in the British North American colonies.

As a result, the latter helped them win the war against the British ruling class and their gullible soldiers. It was Werner Sombart who has been credited with the phrase, "No theory, no history." When studying nations, groups or individuals, throughout Europe and North America especially, it becomes apparent that scholars abound with "historical approaches". As a matter of fact, both retail and university bookstores, along with public libraries, are full of literature regarding the subject of "historiography".

Moreover, for the most part, such publications represent the views of the ruling bodies. That is, those who control the manner in which people gain access to wealth, also advance specific attitudes and ideas to keep themselves in power. After all, the "onus" is on the aforesaid rulers themselves to maintain their wealth advantage. (see Lloyd Hogan's The Principles of Black Political Economy)

At any rate, ever since the end of World War 2, the most common method used for translating the history of African American people is to portray "white" history in blackface. That is, "white" history is based upon deceitful scholarship which calls upon everyday people to identify with an organized "minority" (i.e., European rulers and other celebrities), as opposed to the "majority" (that is, ordinary Non-European and European folks, who, historically, have been born into circumstances where little opportunity has existed for them to become a part of the here-to-mentioned ruling classes.)

Specifically, acting as sycophants for their rulers (mostly, in order to eat, unfortunately), many North American educators and media people have concocted a "white" past that somehow connects all European Americans, as well as non-European Americans, with the rulers of Greece and Rome, that later progresses to being an even greater miraculously twisted logic, linking the aforesaid everyday European Americans and non-European Americans (preponderantly of non-English heritage) to the Kings and Queens of England, before bringing these aforementioned ordinary folks to their ultimate and "natural" psychological, emotional and spiritual union with North American businessmen and their flunkies called politicians.

It should be no surprise then that, in trying to satisfy book publishers and other media outlets, even many mainstream African American historians, particularly for the past generation or so, have focused their work largely on the deeds of African monarchs (rulers) and individual achievers as opposed to the circumstances in which the majority of African Americans, along with our brethren on the great continent (Africa) and throughout the Diaspora, have found and continue to find ourselves.

Of course, there are some exceptions to this rule. For example, books like Ivan Van Sertima's, They Came Before Columbus, Lerone Bennett's, Before The Mayflower, and Vince Harding's, There Is A River, and a number of books by Molefi Asante, have contributed immensely to our knowledge regarding the historical experiences of Africans in the Americas. Nonetheless, the vast majority of the available literature as well as the practice that seems to persist among many social theorists and writers is to present the history of African Americans in the same manner that North Americans view a Sear's catalog. Therefore, revelations such as: "Guess who made the first street light?" or "Guess who was the first African American airplane pilot?", are analogous to "Ooh, look at those nice tires!" or "Ooh, look at that great stereo system!" In other words, it gives the person a “lift”.

This excitement seemed to come from a new breed of African Americans who were, as they made their large migration from the South to northern states following World War 2, trying to fit into the previously-mentioned "mainstream" American society. For instance, during the just-mentioned post-war period, it became quite common for urban African Americans to brag, "I'm the first one on my block.". or "I'm the only one on my job." Widely distributed magazines with names like Ebony, Jet, and Sepia were born and specifically appealed to this kind of sentiment. Ubfortunately, this type of petty mentality still persists among far too many African Americans. So now it’s “Ooh, we have the first Black president!” Still, and fortunately, there are increasing numbers of African American folks who choose to side with their own cultural brothers and sisters as opposed to being imitators or "wannabes."

Notwithstanding the abovementioned, at least to me, our approach to African American history should be centered around the economical, political and social circumstances in which African Americans as a whole, not "famous" individual achievers, have found themselves during the past sixteen generations or so in North America, particularly. Additionally, by observing African Americans as a people whose cultural presence not only blends with, but has, historically, contributed a special texture to the whole social fabric of this society, we may then be able to understand both why and how we have responded to and sustained ourselves through various periods during the historical development of the United States of America

Clearly, when exploring the historical process of any society or population group, its development cannot be understood by merely recording the deeds of ministers, merchants, monarchs, or militarists alone. After all, a leader without followers is better study for a psychologist than an historian. Therefore, it is also necessary to know the circumstances in which citizens, as a whole, find themselves, during a particular period. Then the choices of actions that they take have real meaning for us, since the obvious limitations of the options that exist for them only allow a specific number of results to occur.

For example, in the British North American colonies, since Puritan ministers were the moral and ideological (and, often, even business) leaders in their communities, then it follows that both thought and behavior in New England - (the area that has historically been and still remains to be the bedrock of North American intellect and customs) were very much influenced by the African captives who generally lived and worked, as well as ate and slept in the same house, with the abovementioned clergymen/captors.

As well, African Americans, besides helping folks learn to relax from their uptight Puritan style by listening to music and dancing (please remember, before the War of Independence, dancing was illegal in Puritan New England, for instance), these African peoples brought with them skills such as farming, animal husbandry and medical care, along with politeness and table manners (character attributes unknown to most Europeans, at the time). In fact, North American culture can only be appreciated within the context of its African as well as its British, and to a lesser extent German, Dutch, and French, along with Early American Native, origins.

Of course, no one asks to be born. That simple fact, usually, even becomes clear to the most stubborn and argumentative person. Also, it is equally apparent that, in order to be born in the first place, at least one living person has to already exist (a Mother). Therefore, it logically follows that we are each born into situations which are directly tied to the economic, political and social well-being of our parent(s). Also, even the very language that we use has a connection with our social relationships. We need only refer to Franz Fanon's contention that inside the language of a people is "the world expressed and implied by that language".

In the final analysis, nonetheless, it should become evident that the real legacy of African American people is a group struggle for "equality, dignity, and justice" - not simply individual achievements of "high" social significance, inventions, or athletic excellence. In addition, all Americans should appreciate the importance of African American contributions, enmeshed with the offerings of all other cultural groups that have helped bring this nation to its current prominence. If we do that, then, ultimately, we should all be able to realize: African American history is not a separate history; rather, it merely includes more people in the real story of Our country.

One Love,

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Senator Obama and African American Spirituality (originally posted 9/14/08)

"Please remember that our spirituality should be a vitamin - not a drug."




Dear friends,

According to almost all of the agencies of the mass communications media, if he is successful, which I believe he will be, Senator Barack Obama will become our nation's "first Black president". I do not like that moniker though. I find that notion bothersome, because, at least to me, it trivializes both the historical and present contributions made by African Americans to both the development and continued proliferation of the United States as an advanced world power...

In other words, to imply that Barack Obama winning this election is the greatest achievement of our cultural group, ignores the fact that the active protestations of African Americans have been at the lead, in enhancing both freedom and democracy, at every historical stage in this country, for all citizens. This includes the time when a "6-2' mulatto" man named Crispus Attucks, standing in the front of a group of English colonists, against British troops, on the Boston Commons, was the first one shot and killed that special day. That confrontation, of course, was the catalyst for the official start of the War of Independence that turned thirteen colonies into the nation in which we now live - and love.

African Americans are an African people, from many different African cities and villages, who were forcibly made part of an enterprise that initially began amongst Arabs and Eastern Europeans (from where the word "slave" came), about a thousand years or forty generations ago as the International Slave Trade. However, it deteriorated into being what Dr. W.E.B. DuBois described as the "hunting of black skins" not long after Christopher Columbus' famed voyage across the Ocean Sea, renaming that enterprise the Atlantic Slave Trade.

Yet, the institution now known as the "Black Church" did not begin when European enslavers used red-hot iron brands and scarred captive African workers, so-called slaves, while reading the latter verses from the Holy Bible, in a process called seasoning. Rather, the Black Church started in the holds of the aforementioned enslavers' hideous vessels. Again, people from different cities and villages, speaking different languages and having varied customs, were now forced to embrace that which they shared as Africans - their religiosity.

But when we talk about our "souls"/spirituality it seems to mean different things to different people. And so, in his work called After Many a Summer Dies the Swan, Aldous Huxley offered, "Our 'souls' are so little 'us' that we cannot even form the remotest conception how 'we' should react to the universe, if we were ignorant of language, or even of our own language. The nature of our 'souls' and of the world they inhabit would be entirely different from what it is, if we had never learnt to talk, or if we had learnt to talk Eskimo instead of English. Madness consists, among other things, in imagining that our 'soul' exists apart from the language our nurses happen to have taught us."

Huxley makes an observation here that helps to explain the photo on the left, above, which shows Senator Barack Obama, literally, surrounded, in a very private situation , by a group of fellow African Americans - engaging in a group prayer. To be sure, they are not concerned with whether or not he belongs to a particular religious denomination. There is something much deeper happening there. For African peoples have appreciated their spirituality, long before they had ever heard of Europeans, or even Asians, for that matter.

In his book African Religions and Philosophies, John Mbiti reveals, “Wherever the African is, there is his religion: he carries it to the fields where he is sowing seeds or harvesting a new crop; he takes it with him to the beer party or to attend a funeral ceremony; and if he is educated, he takes religion with him to the examination room at school or in the university...Traditional religions are not primarily for the individual, but for his community of which he is a part...What people do is motivated by what they believe, and what they believe springs from what they do and experience. So then, belief and action in African traditional society cannot be separated: they belong to a single whole.”

Up until the end of 19th Century America, religious institutions were largely community-oriented, among both African Americans and European Americans. Today, however, for the most part, in this possession-oriented society, the individual as a "believer", as opposed to his or her membership in a community of believers, is what is promoted as the greatest importance to the commonweal.

Still, the congregants of Black churches have always been at the forefront of our cultural group's social progress, by engaging in activities that deal with our outer as well as our inner liberation, such as church folks helping to free captive workers (so-called slaves) during the period of chattel slavery to organizing then leading protest marches and providing facilities for breakfast programs for school children, as they did in the Sixties and Seventies - to helping to lead the fight against apartheid in the Eighties.

Unfortunately, too often today, a lot of much concentration is on “being saved” and using the word “God” in every other sentence as some type of password to have membership in "the herd". Many folks are even using religion as a narcotic - like heroin or cocaine; a common refrain from them is: "I'm high on Jesus!".

Also, having “fellowship” is another term that is being bandied about these days. I went to a church, quite recently, whose Sunday program sheet read at the bottom, after the hymns and prayers listed: Worship ends, Service begins. Unfortunately, and shamefully, this was not in a Black church.

Black preachers must imitate the life of the historical Jesus who fed the hungry and healed the sick - physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually. The latter did not just sit around and pray. He "worked" for change. During 1963, in his now famous Letter From Birmingham Jail, Dr. Martin Luther King wrote, in part:

"There was a time when the church was very powerful in the time when the early Christians rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Whenever the early Christians entered a town, the people in power became disturbed and immediately sought to convict the Christians for being "disturbers of the peace" and "outside agitators"' But the Christians pressed on, in the conviction that they were "a colony of heaven," called to obey God rather than man. Small in number, they were big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be "astronomically intimidated." By their effort and example they brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide. and gladiatorial contests.

Things are different now. So often the contemporary church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. So often it is an archdefender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church's silent and often even vocal sanction of things as they are.

But the judgment of God is upon the church as never before. If today's church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. Every day I meet young people whose disappointment with the church has turned into outright disgust.

Perhaps I have once again been too optimistic. Is organized religion too inextricably bound to the status quo to save our nation and the world? Perhaps I must turn my faith to the inner spiritual church, the church within the church, as the true ekklesia and the hope of the world. But again I am thankful to God that some noble souls from the ranks of organized religion have broken loose from the paralyzing chains of conformity and joined us as active partners in the struggle for freedom, They have left their secure congregations and walked the streets..."

While Dr. King's "letter" was largely directed towards "white" clergy, today, these words, very much, apply to most African American clerics across the nation, as well. That is a fact that should bring a feeling of shame to many who call themselves ecclesiastics. The Black Church has the power to change things! It is not up to "God" to make this world better. After all, if it is, then why does "He" need clerics?

In any case, as a wise man once wrote, "...(humans) are deeply concerned with 'spiritual' things - and impoverish themselves if they ignore them...(But) if people's material life is impoverished, they do not get much chance to cultivate the things of the spirit-just as they do not do so either if they fail to appreciate the real character of human relations and concern themselves with nothing but their own individual material satisfactions. If only we can better inform our practice - by getting better to know ourselves, our needs, our dependencies on one another, we stand at least a chance of finding how in practice to cultivate all the higher human capacities, the things of the spirit."

Finally, to be sure, African peoples of the Americas, have a lengthy history of identifying with spiritual things. Had we not, then there would have been no way for us to have endured the long voyages crunched up beside - and stacked up on top of - one another in our mutual stench, for months at a time, much less being able to sustain ourselves, for centuries, in chattel slavery, as well as the continued impropriety directed towards us, even at this present date, by many of our fellows citizens, at all levels of society. Therefore, the real "spirit" of African American people is reflected in our legacy - a lengthy struggle for equality, dignity and justice. Friends, the power of love and its goodness will overcome the weakness of greed and injustice.

Moreover, please remember that our spirtualityshoukld be a vitamin - not a drug.

One Love, One Heart, One Spirit,
G. Djata Bumpus

Read full post

Quincy Jones has started a petition...(originally posted 1/19/09)

We in the arts need this and the country needs the arts--now more than ever...

Dear Friends,

Quincy Jones has started a petition to ask President Obama to appoint a Secretary of the Arts. While many other countries have had Ministers ofArt or Culture for centuries, the United States has never created such a position. We in the arts need this and the country needs the arts--now more than ever. On the link below, please take a moment to sign this important petition and then pass it on to your friends and colleagues. Peace.

G. Djata Bumpus
www.petitiononline.com/esnyc/petition.html
Read full post

The Angeline Palmer Story (A children's tale) originally posted in June, 2008

At this African American History Month, we seem to have much for which to be grateful, especially, considering the recent election victory for ourselves and the Obamas.

Dear friends,

At this African American History Month, we seem to have much for which to be grateful, especially, considering the recent election victory for ourselves and the Obamas. Consequently, I thought it is, perhaps, instructive for us to re-visit an earlier post on this blog that shows what can happen when communities are united.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
**************************************
The following is a true, and very short, story about a young Amherst, Massachusetts girl who faced enslavement in 1840. It was written by one of my brothers, Eshu Bumpus, a renowned storyteller, based upon research done by yours truly. It has already been published several times (books, magazines, and so forth). Now it appears here.

In any case, it shows evidence of the operation of the Underground Railroad in the Amherst, Massachusetts area. Of course,Underground Railroad is the "romantic" term used, in US school books and the mainstream media, to describe an alleged system of escape for African captive workers (so-called slaves). However, there was no actual “system” as such. Rather, there were many ways that folks escaped from slavery. For example, some hid in wagons, while others either earned or were given money and simply hopped on trains.
**************************************

It was a seemingly ordinary Spring day, in the month of May, 168 years or three grandmothers ago (i.e., roughly around the time that the grandmother of the grandmother of a present-day newborn's grandmother lived). Angeline Palmer was an 11 years-old orphan. She was so poor that, in Amherst, where she had been born and raised, the townspeople decided to find a family that would care for her. She had an older brother named Lewis B. Frazier (her late mother's son from a previous marriage) who lived in Amherst. But he was only twenty years-old and could not afford to take care of her by himself.

Meanwhile, Mason and Susan Shaw, a European American couple from nearby Belchertown, offered to take Angeline to live with them. They seemed like a nice couple, so Amherst town officials were satisfied to have found a home for Angeline.

But things were not as pleasant as they seemed. The Shaws had a secret reason for taking Angeline. They had been planning to visit one of the Southern states where many African Americans were still being held in slavery. Mr. and Mrs. Shaw decided to take Angeline with them in order to sell her to a slave trader, because captive workers (so-called slaves)could be sold for lots of money. At any rate, to complete their scheme, when the Shaws returned to Massachusetts, they would tell people that Angeline ran away.

Luckily, a woman overheard Mason Shaw telling some of his friends about the scheme. She did not like what the Shaws were planning. So she made sure that Angeline's brother, Lewis, found out about it. Lewis Frazier was a brave young man. He was not going to let anything happen to his sister. Lewis got two of his friends, Henry Jackson and William Jennings, to help him. The three young African American men broke into the Shaw's house and rescued Angeline. They brought Angeline to Spencer and Sarah Church's farm in North Amherst. The Church family was European American. Although she had eight children of her own, Mrs. Church agreed to care for Angeline and hide her when necessary.

Of course, Lewis knew that his sister could not stay in Amherst. He and his two friends sought the advice of an African American woman named Huldah Kiles who also lived in North Amherst. She brought Lewis and Angeline to her brother, Charles Green, who lived in Colrain, a small town next to the Vermont border. At last, Angeline had found a real home.

Because of how and from where they rescued Angeline, the three men were wanted by the local legal authorities. So, about two weeks after bringing her to safety, Jennings, Jackson and Frazier turned themselves in and were put in jail. Fortunately, because they all had jobs, the men were immediately able to obtain bail bonds and, therefore, freed from jail, until their case was brought before a judge.

When the trial came up, several months later, the judge offered to dismiss all charges if the trio would reveal Angeline's whereabouts. But the young men knew that they were right and would not say a word. So, they were sentenced to three months in the Hampshire County Jail, in neighboring Northampton. Knowing their story, however, Mr. Clapp - the jail keeper, did not take their sentence seriously. He let them leave the jail during the day as long as they promised to return at night, which they did. They were also allowed plenty of visitors who brought them food and clothes. When finally the three returned home to Amherst, they were received as heroes by both African Americans and European Americans alike.

Although Lewis Frazier died about ten years later from a hip complaint, Henry Jackson, who lived out his life in Amherst for over 60 years after the abovementioned incident, went on to become one of the town's most distinguished citizens. William Jennings also remained in Amherst, a little more than 20 years later, became a hero of the North American Civil War. Jennings. He served first in the all-AfricanAmerican 54th Regiment , then later he re-enlisted in the 5th Massachusetts cavalry. Both of these fighting units were depicted in the Hollywood production called Glory, starring Denzel Washington. The very brave Angeline Palmer continued to live a secure and happy childhood in Colrain, before re-appearing in Amherst, eleven years after her escape/rescue, as a married woman with children./em>

For more info about Eshu's storytelling, please copy and paste the following link to your browser: www.folktales.net
Read full post

Response from an Elder about "inalienable rights"?

"To alienate any person is to bring a sure division between that person and another who are expected to receive the same judicial treatment in a humane way as is defined by the Constitution..."

Dear friends,

Below, is a brief response about last week's piece called " 'Inalienable Rights' and gay marriage", from my Mother (who just turned "84" the day before President Obama's inauguration). She mentions the fact that the principles upon which this country was founded ignore the reality that there were many "captive workers" (so-called slaves) here, and the injustices did not stop there.

I think that it is extremely important to note here that slavery was a class institution, not a "race" one. As a matter of fact, many of the so-called "slaves" were European American or "white", albeit mostly "indentured servants" or temporary slaves. As well, at least as early as 1656 in Boston, we know that there were also a number of Black slave masters. In the 19th Century, there were, in fact, thousands of Black slave masters controlling many more thousands of "slaves" - both Black and "white". Also, thousands of Blacks fought on the Confederate side, during the Civil War, to expand slavery. In order to investigate my assertions, please simply go to your Web browser and/or the local library; as well, if you live in either New England or the South, go to your town or city records department.

In any case, we have not heard from my Mom, in several months, on this blog. As always, I am both honored and pleased to share her thoughts with you.

One Love, One Heart, One Spirit,
G. Djata Bumpus
*****************************************
Dearest #5 son Djata,

Let me tell you what I see that is an integral part of the U.S. Constitution and its "inalienable rights" crap. It was written, while black men and women and their offspring were "slaves" in a system that legally used them as marketable commodities. Were these persons entitled to the same rights as their white officials and neighbors? The answer is an unequivocal "NO".

Need I say more? To alienate any person is to bring a sure division between that person and another who is expected to receive the same judicial treatment in a humane way as is defined by the Constitution. But, if that person has all the physical body parts in the right place and a mind that functions, then you allow him or her to toil laboriously equal to a mule, and not be treated as humanely as the law should allow, where are the "inalienable rights"? Sweet or correct words do not "cut the mustard". America is famous for words that do not match deeds.

Keep the Faith,

Love,
Mom
Read full post

More Interview/Discussion with Neil Zagorin about Palestine/Israel

"The Israeli narrative about the creation of the Palestinian refugee population was that these refugees fled either on their own initiative or upon the urging of their leaders. The Palestinian narrative has been that they were driven out..."

**************************************
Djata: We especially hear the term “Zionism”, coming from Arab Muslims and their supporters, whenever there are bloody conflicts such as the one happening in Gaza right now. How do you define Zionism, Neil?

Neil: Jews lived in many parts of the world since the end of the Roman Empire, and remembrance of the biblical land of Israel has been important in Judaism, in the study of bible and in prayers. Zionism was a 19th century philosophy, originating in Europe, that took this impulse and turned it into a secular, nationalist movement to establish a homeland for the Jewish people.

The great majority of Zionists were not religiously inspired, but rather viewed Jews as an ethnic/national group on the basis of their shared experience as a distinctive minority in many places. Being a minority meant being vulnerable, and in 19th century Europe Jewish communities were not only vulnerable but often mistreated. Having a homeland like everybody else would solve this – that was the belief of Zionism.

There were different viewpoints within Zionism. For example, some thought that having viable Jewish communities in the biblical land of Israel as places of refuge and as centers of Jewish cultural renewal would be a suitable goal. This was known as Spiritual Zionism. The majority view, in the end, was known as Political Zionism, whose central figure is a late 19th century Austrian journalist named Theodor Herzl. Political Zionism sought to develop a modern Jewish nation-state in the ancestral homeland of Jewish people, the Land of Israel – also known as Palestine.


Djata: Does Zionism, whether spiritual or political, represent an attempt by some Jews to “perfect” the understanding and practical expression of their religion, for themselves?

Neil: Zionism was largely a secular movement. Certainly it sought to reformulate Jewish cultural norms and practices, which were rooted in or influenced by Judaism, into norms and practices that could underpin and cement a modern Jewish nation-state.

Djata: Do you believe that Zionism is a form of “self-estrangement”, inasmuch as it is embraced as Jewish people’s nationality as “Jews” over and above their nationalities as, say, North Americans or Europeans ?

Neil: I don’t think that Jews as a group fit into any neat category. At times it’s made sense to view Jews as a community sharing a religion: Judaism. This is how most Jews in the US view themselves today, for example, and this is how Jews are viewed within the US.

At other times it’s made sense to view Jews as an ethnic or national group. Often this has made sense because of the reactions of others. During the period of the Spanish Inquisition, for example, “Jewishness” was a matter of “blood.” A Jew who converted to Christianity could still be regarded as a Jew. In 19th century Europe, the attitude of Christians towards Jews in many places was similar to this. So, for 19th century Zionists, living in an environment where the separation was already there, embracing Jewish “nationalism” wasn’t a matter of self-estrangement, it was an attempt to make a virtue out of a problem.

Is being Jewish a matter of religion or ethnic/national identity? This has been a puzzling dilemma for Jews in the West for the past couple of centuries. Zionism was one of many attempts at resolving this, and Jews have tried resolving it in both ways.

Djata: Particularly in the mainstream media of our country, we hear about Israel’s “right to defend itself”. Yet, since these bloody conflicts, here-to-mentioned, seem to go on constantly and – at least to me – will not end with statehood for Palestinians, is there an issue of legitimacy that the government of Israel is always trying to prove to itself, its citizens, and others?

Neil: The short answer: yes. The State of Israel was born in conflict and lives in conflict. Israel, or at least its ruling elites and supporters, constantly seeks affirmation of legitimacy. There’s a question of what type of legitimacy Israel seeks: as a potent force not to be messed with, or as a society with which its neighbors can live in peace and respect.

Djata: Neil, do you agree with the Palestinian assertion that they were intentionally expelled by Yishuv and later Israeli forces in terms of a plan drawn up even before the war?

Neil: “Yishuv” is the Hebrew term for the community of Jewish settlements in pre-1948 Palestine. The Israeli narrative about the creation of the Palestinian refugee population was that these refugees fled either on their own initiative or upon the urging of their leaders. The Palestinian narrative has been that they were driven out. Jewish militias drove Palestinians from their homes. That this happened is beyond doubt. It is reflected not only in the stories of Palestinian refugees, but by the work of the Israeli “new historians” of the past generation who have found documentation of this in Israeli governmental sources.

I do not know the degree to which the intentional displacement was pre-planned and organized in a top-down fashion. I have heard conflicting claims about this, but it seems fair to assume that there was some level of forethought and planning.

There were also Palestinians who fled a war zone of their own initiative, and Palestinian leaders who ordered their people to move away from the fighting. It is important to acknowledge this to avoid fruitless quibbling about which side did what. I do not know which of the two factors was the most important, and am happy to leave that to be determined by historians in the fullness of time. The important fact to me is that, on the Zionist side, there was definitely intentional displacement of Arabs in order to establish the new Jewish nation-state.

Djata: What do you think of Dr. Ilan Pappe’s claim that, “If you don't understand colonialism, ethnic cleansing and the war for freedom, you can't understand Palestine”?

Neil: Ilan Pappe is one of the Israeli “new historians”. He takes his conclusions about Israel’s willful suppression of Palestinian national aspirations farther than others, and is for that reason very controversial. I want to acknowledge that before responding to this quote. I'm just somebody who cares about justice and human dignity for all. I can’t judge his basis for selecting these three criteria as the bottom-line basis for “understanding Palestine”. I do think that examining these areas is very revealing.

Colonialism: Zionism was not a monolithic movement. However, it emerged in its modern form in late 19th-century Europe, and reflects some of the same beliefs that motivated and justified colonialism by European powers. The State of Israel controls the land from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River today, and as such is the primary force limiting Palestinian nationhood. I think it is also important to recognize that the Ottoman Empire before World War 1, and the British Empire after it, controlled this land and played a role in how the conflict between Zionist settlers and Arabs developed and unfolded.

Ethnic cleansing: Intentional displacement of Palestinians to create a Jewish nation-state played a part in the birth of the State of Israel. This must be taken into account when discussing relations between Palestinians and Israel.

The war for freedom: This primarily means the Palestinian struggle for national freedom. Previously it took a politically nationalistic expression. Now, with the ascendancy of Hamas, it is taking an Islamist-nationalist form. I don’t know whether Ilan Pappe intends the following, but the conflict between Israel and Palestinians has taken place in a larger context of Third-World nation-state formation and the struggle for freedom from Western control or dominance. Lastly, Zionism was a bold but desperate attempt to seek freedom for Jews on a national/ethnic basis. It was not an attempt to exploit a colonial possession for the benefit of a colonial power far away, and for most Israeli Jews the survival of their state is a matter of both political and physical life and death. I think that acknowledging this sheds light on an important reason that this conflict is so enduring and bitter, and why it is so difficult to see the way forward to a resolution. But this brings us full circle: when thinking of the struggle for freedom in the context of Palestine/Israel, it is the Palestinians who do not have national freedom. There can not be any reasonable resolution until they do.

Djata: I understand what you are saying. I don't like to use the term "Third world", because, like the term "minority", it suggests that certain people are "naturally" inferior to others. Therefore, I prefer non-European. However, since Jews are not a monolithic group, that means that various Jews have different interests. That having been said, iff Zionists simply wanted a place where they can live in peace and be left alone, then why did they expand their originally-allotted territory, along with conducting business with a number of world powers, especially the United States, that allows the Israeli government a presence - and influence - in other lands?

Neil: Guess I date myself by using the term “Third World,” don’t I?

You ask about Zionists wanting a place where Jews could live in peace. Again, Zionism has encompassed a variety of outlooks. Many of them were not so utopian as to imagine that nationhood would bring “peace.” Nationhood would bring “normalcy,” that is, Jews as a people doing all the things that any people do to make their way independently in the world. Build, work (in all levels of the economy, not just those to which the host country allows access,) play, make decisions. Peace is sometimes part of the picture, but so is conflict.

Modern Zionism developed in late nineteenth-century Europe, a time and place when many of the stereotypes of Jews being treated as victimized outsiders were in fact true (and I don’t subscribe to the view of Jewish history that says this is the essence of Jewish life in Europe.) One of the roots of the Israeli army is in local Jewish self-defense groups that arose in towns and cities in Central and Eastern Europe in response to waves of pogroms. Many rank-and-file Zionists who came to Palestine were accustomed to an atmosphere of violence and expected a hard life. They called themselves “halutzim,” or “pioneers,” and they meant it.

So, let’s turn your question into a statement. The State of Israel seeks to project its power beyond its borders. There are a number of reasons for this.

When Zionism was in its visionary phase, it often imagined a Jewish state on the land from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River (and even beyond.) This is not how the borders were drawn by the UN in 1947, and not how the borders were fixed at the end of the 1948-49 war. I want to believe that most Israeli Jews, if given the choice between endless war and a realistic chance for a saner life, would not hold to a vision of a larger Israel. However, there are sectors of the Israeli political system that do hold strongly to it, for nationalistic, religious, military, or other reasons. This is a major explanation for the continuing growth of Jewish settlement in the West Bank, even during this past 15 years of negotiations for a two-state solution.

The State of Israel also acts as a regional force. Some of Israel’s reasons for doing this relate to its perceived national interests. Other times, Israel gets swept up in larger political currents. Many local and international powers vie for influence and control in this area. There have been regional rivalries beyond that of Palestinians and Israel. On a larger scale, the Cold War rivalry seems to have been replaced by a rivalry between Iran and the US-led bloc. War, bloodshed, and other suffering result from these things. Israel is not blameless, but there's a lot of guilt to share in this.

Please stay tuned...
Read full post

"Racial Profiling" is still "over-the-top" - in New York City alone

"The NYPD is on pace to stop and question a record half a million citizens this year - about 80% of them black or Latino, a new report says…In 2007, for instance, the last complete year of data, cops arrested only 5.8% of the 472,096 people they stopped (27,632)..."

Dear friends,

With an African American governor of New York state, and, now, an African American president of the United States, hopefully, the figures that were just released four days before President Obama's inauguration, on the link below, will be a thing of the past - very soon.

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2009/01/15/2009-01-15_blacks_and_latinos_make_up_about_80_stop.html
Read full post

A story about 800 "settlers"

"As bloody and inhuman as the situation in Gaza is, there is a much wider story, regarding the plight of Palestinian people..."

Dear friends,

As bloody and inhuman as the situation in Gaza is, there is a much wider story, regarding the plight of Palestinian people. On the link below is a piece that was written last year that points to a problem that all Palestinians share, whether in Gaza or elsewhere.

G. Djata Bumpus
http://judaismandisrael.blogspot.com/2008/01/abomination-800-jewish-settlers-of.html
Read full post

An important interview about the Middle East

"It strikes me that if democracy and reform spread throughout the Middle East, it would not be helpful for either Israel or America, as it is the current repressive regimes that keep these nations in the American orbit. Were there genuine democracy, nations such as Egypt would certainly not be supporting America, as the Arab street is far more uncompromisingly anti-Zionist than the more pragmatic Arab ruling class..."

Dear friends,

In light of the most recent massacre of Palestinian people in the Gaza strip by Israeli troops, it seems, at least to me, that we should consider the environment of the Middle East , generally, during the past several years leading up to this mess. On the link below is an interview with Avi Shlaim, one of the world's most formidable scholars on this issue. The discussion was recorded back on 2004.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040628/attapatu
Read full post

Bumpus on "Inalienable Rights" and Gay marriage

"... the concept of "rights" is a human creation that has only been around Western civilization since the 18th Century..."

Dear friends,

Just the other day, I sent a letter to my local newspaper, regarding an article by nationally-syndicated columnist George Will about gay marriage. Considering the recent defeat that African Americans helped to give to proponents of gay marriage in California, on the same day they voted for Barack Obama to become our nation's 44th president, I thought that it is time that I comment on this subject. As well, hearing our new president make a reference to "inalienable rights", during his inauguration speech, seemed to make this post fitting. The letter appears below.

One Love,

G. Djata Bumpus
**********************************************
To the Editor:

George Will's piece called " 'Natural justice' and gay marriage", posted 1/15/09, reveals the discussion of gay marriage to be exactly what it is: A total distraction, if not a red herring.

The idea of "inalienable rights", much less "natural justice" ignores reality, sending us into the murky world of mysticism and illusion. That is, the concept of "rights" is a human creation that has only been around Western civilization since the 18th Century.

"Rights" are fought for - not bestowed upon a person, by either the State or Providence. They are not “inalienable