Tuesday, November 15, 2011

reflections on the 2011 AUDELCOS



Yesterday I had the pleasure of attending the 2011 AUDELCO awards. AUDELCO stands for Audience Development Company, and was founded in 1973 by Vivian Robinson as a way to consistently recognize outstanding work in Black theater. The play that gathered most AUDELCO awards this year was Charles Smith's play KNOCK ME A KISS. It picked up eight awards including best dramatic production of the year. This is a powerful period piece set in 1928 that focuses on the marriage of Yolande Du Bois, daughter of W.E.B. Du Bois, and poet Countee Cullen. This was a production of the New Federal Theater and Creative Arts Legacy from Chicago. I was grateful to see a performance of this play around this time last year and what impressed me most about this play was how sympathetic the character of Yolande was to me. I was able to relate to her ideas about marriage requiring stability but more than anything, I was able to relate to her in the second half of the play when she feels shame for following society's standards about marriage and how that limited her options in ways that it didn't limit Countee's. Knock Me A Kiss was a powerful play for me because it is set in the same year that a play that I wrote is set in: 1928. And it deals with similar issues of marriage and fidelity to one's partner and one's profession and how the two interact. I hope this play gets a very important new life.

Congratulations to all 2011 AUDELCO award winners: lighting design, Shirley Prendergast for KNOCK ME A KISS; for set design, Anthony Davidson for KNOCK ME A KISS; for costume design, Ali Turns for KNOCK ME A KISS; for sound design, Bill Toles for KNOCK ME A KISS; for director of a dramatic production, Chuck Smith for KNOCK ME A KISS; for choreography, Tracy Jack for IT AIN'T NOTHIN' BUT THE BLUES; for playwright, Charles Smith for KNOCK ME A KISS; for supporting actor, Andre Holland for THE WHIPPING MAN; for supporting actress, Marie Thomas for KNOCK ME A KISS; for outstanding female performance in a musical, Toni Seawright for THE WIDOW AND MISS MAMIE; for outstanding male performance in a musical, Tommie Johnson for THE WIDOW AND MISS MAMIE; for outstanding musical director, Ron Granger for THE WIDOW AND MISS MAMIE; for outstanding musical production, IT AINT NOTHIN BUT THE BLUES; for outstanding ensemble performance, the cast of PLAYING WITH HEINER MULLER; for best solo performance, Stephanie Berry for THE SHANEEQUA CHRONICLES; for best lead actor, Andre De Shields for KNOCK ME A KISS; for best lead actress it was a tie: Sanaa Lathan for BY THE WAY MEET VERA STARK and Kimberlee Monroe for NOBODY KNEW WHERE THEY WAS. For best drama, KNOCK ME A KISS.

Congratulations for Jackie Jeffries for her getting AUDELCO'S Board of Directors Award. I had the pleasure of seeing the play Jackie produced called A SEASON IN THE CONGO written by the late great Aime Cesaire. This play bears so much relevance to the tragic ousting of Gadafi that took place earlier this year. Cesaire chose to dramatize a leader with strong popular democratic appeal who was ousted by the U.S. because he would not participate in the U.S. exploitation of African resources. I applaud Jackie Jeffries' choice to produce this important play in 2010 to shed light on how our foreign policies continue to undermine the sovereign rights of other nations. I will continue to support Jackie's powerful work.

I am grateful to see the legacy and vision of Vivian Robinson continue with the AUDELCO awards and I hope that despite our government's very repressive austerity measures, we will still have Black theater to celebrate for years to come. I hope we will put in the work needed to protest military occupations across the world and lobby as a citizen for more funding for arts education in school. -RF.

(PHOTO OF THE CAST OF KNOCK ME A KISS, clockwise from top left: Marie Thomas who played Nina Du Bois, Erin Cherry who played Yolande Du Bois, Sean Phillips who played Countee Cullen, and Andre De Shields who played W.E.B. Du Bois, COURTESY OF WEBSITE: http://www2.journalnow.com/entertainment/2011/aug/04/wsmet03-knock-me-a-kiss-sparkles-as-cast-shines-ar-1267554/)

Friday, November 11, 2011

A Brave Martyr of the Negro Revolution: A Full Review of Katori Hall's The Mountaintop



A BRAVE MARTYR OF THE NEGRO REVOLUTION: A FULL REVIEW OF KATORI HALL’S PLAY THE MOUNTAINTOP IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PRISON LETTERS OF GEORGE JACKSON

(WARNING: This review explains the whole story of this play so if you do not want to know the whole story because you plan to see this play and you want to be surprised, please don't read this review)
In her play The Mountaintop, Katori Hall presents a very sympathetic portrayal of Martin Luther King, Jr. on his last night alive. Her stage directions tell us: “Lights up. Night. April 3, 1968. Room 306. The Lorraine Motel. Memphis, Tennessee.” While none of us actually know what exactly went through the mind of Martin Luther King the night before he died, it is obvious that the literary imagination of Katori Hall in producing Martin Luther King is one that contains his most important political message of anti imperialism. In about one hundred minutes, all of which take place in a hotel room on stage, we learn so much more about Martin Luther King Jr., namely his mortality but also the brutal world in which he loses his mortality. The play assumes a knowledge about the influence of Martin Luther King Jr. on American society and captures important and threatening words and messages King conveyed, mainly his growing critique of American imperialism. In fact, King’s first words are his reading his own speech saying: “Why America is going to hell…America you are too ARROGANT! [caps in Hall’s original]” This is a direct reference to King’s April 4, 1967 speech at the Riverside Church where he condemns America for killing people of color in Vietnam. He later said in this speech: “the world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve. It demands that we admit we have been wrong from the beginning of our adventure in Vietnam, that we have been detrimental to the life of Vietnamese people” (Washington, ed., 239). His speech was so controversial that he was killed exactly one year following this speech on April 4, 1968.
Hall chooses to begin her interpretation of King with this utterance of “America you are too ARROGANT!” He then calls room service and asks for coffee. Soon, a maid Camae, arrives, whom stage directions tell us is “a beautiful young maid.” When she comes in the room and sets the tray on a table downstage from her entrance, and bends down, King “appreciates his view.” Hall shows King as a man who is weakened by a woman’s physical beauty. This is one of known human foibles of King that made up this brilliant thinker and intellectual. Camae tells King “shame I ain’t get a chance to see ya tonight. I heard you carried on a storm up at Mason Temple.” Katori Hall told many news outlets that her own mother, Carrie Mae, was planning to see King on the night of his actual April 3rd speech at Mason Temple. She did not get to attend after talk of a bomb threat. In Camae we see important connections to Hall herself. Through Camae, Hall provides a living breathing character who can more directly attest to the strength of that speech. When King asked how Camae knew about this speech, she replies, “Negro talk strike faster than lightnin.”…I would like to have seen that. Somethin’ to tell my chiren.” We see a desire to have been there on April 3rd, 1968, by the real Carrie Mae like the Camae in the play.
King is impressed by Camae’s choice of cigarettes: Pall Malls. In fact , before Camae even arrives, we hear him yelling outside his motel room to Ralph Abernathy for some Pall Malls. When King sees Camae taking out a pack of Pall Malls, he is impressed. He coaxes her to smoke one with him: “just one. Til my friend come back with my pack.” Camae replies: “you sho’ll do try hard at it,” and joins King in a smoke. They talk. Camae tells King it must be “grand fun” to preach the way he does, then she adds an exclamation: “Must be muthaf—kin’ grand to mean so much to somebody. Shit, GODDAMN must be grand. (Beat) Where a needle and threat to sew up my mouth? Here I is just a cussin all up in front of you, Dr. Kang. I cuss worser than the sailor with the clap…Fallin’ straight to hell.” King replies “No ma’am, ‘cordin’ to your face, you done fell straight from heaven.” Camae replies saying “You lil’ pulpit poet you. I likes you.” King replies to that: “I likes you, too.” The phone rings and its King’s wife, Dr. Coretta Scott King. King converses yet as Camae tries to leave, he motions for her to stay. When King finishes, Camae says: “She’s beautiful. Yo’ wife. I seen’t her on the tv down at Woolworth’s, too. Coretta Scott K—“ but before she finishes the “King,” King interrupts, according to the directions, in a correcting way, with “Mrs. King.” Here Hall introduces the class difference between King and Camae here. Before Camae gains any wild notions of familiarity with Dr. King himself, he makes sure to dispel them by reminding her that his wife is Mrs. King, not Coretta, to Camae. Hall’s King in an extremely subtle way reminds Camae not to expect their encounter to last more than that night. And according to the play and to history, it really doesn’t. Hall in an important way shows King’s upper class status as a trained intellectual who makes sure he does not let the status of working class African American affect what Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham has described in Righteous Discontent standards of class respectability. In King’s mind, if Camae is familiar enough to call Mrs. King Coretta, then she might be familiar enough to tell others about King’s weaknesses with her which, in King’s mind, may in fact be a familiarity too threatening to the causes that King was fighting for. However Hall shows us that later that Camae has a strong passion for fighting the race and class oppression that King is fighting against.
King asks for Camae’s opinion on a speech he gives and his looks. After he looks in the mirror, he tells her “I done got to looking old.” When King asks Camae whether women prefer men with wrinkles, Camae chooses to mock King by telling him: “I don’t. I likes ‘em young and wild. Like me.” When King says “I used to be young and wild myself,” Camae replies “you a preacher. That’s part a’ y’all job requirement. How you know what you ain’t supposed to do if you ain’t done it, yaself? Folk won’t listen to you otherwise. That what I call ‘work experience.’ More than qualify ya for the position.” King asks Camae for another cigarette and Camae repeats her refrain, “you SHO’LL try hard at it.” As she prepares to leave one more time, King returns her newspaper to her, and notices that the date on it reads “April 4th.” When he asks her how she got the next day’s newspaper, Camae “shrugs” and says “Tomorrow already here.” Hall is obviously at this moment playing with time and using Camae to do so. In her mind while she was writing this, Camae represents for her, like her mother, a reservoir for the living embodiment of King. Camae in this play blurs time distinction for King. Camae is by now he’s concluded an unusual guest in his room. King reads the headline of the paper she brings:

“’King Challenges Court Restraint. Vows to March.’ [he says] They got that right! This Mayor Loeb calls himself not allowing these sanitation workers to march (to himself). Over my dead body. (reading) ‘Yesterday two U.S. marshals sped across town to serve the Negro leaders with copies of the order. They found Dr. King and four other defendants at the Lorraine Motel...the city said it was seeking the injunction as a means of protecting Dr. King…We are fearful that in the turmoil of the moment, someone may even harm Dr. King’s life…and with all the force of language we can use, we want to emphasize that we don’t want that to happen…” (Chuckles to himself) Wish the mayor had jurisdiction over air planes, too. You know, Camae, somebody called in a bomb threat on my place from Atlanta to Memphis? Thank God they didn’t find one.”

To this Camae concludes “civil rights’ll kill ya’ fo’ them Pall Malls will.” Following this, thunder strikes, and King puts his hand over his chest. The stage directions tell us he begins to breathe hard. The thunder is a shock not only to King but also to the unsuspecting audience member, which helps, on some level, for the audience member to feel some empathy for King and the growing fragility of his life. Hall is rightfully calling into the question the Memphis mayor’s promise of security, especially when at this point his life has been threatened in so many ways. Camae tells King that he should not be scared of a “lil’ lightnin.” When King is about to tell Camae what he thinks the thunder really sounds like, Camae interrupts and says the thunder sounds like “fireworks.” Instead of countering this simile, King agrees and spares her his concerns about the real threat on his life. Camae says: “Mama used to take us on down to Tom Lee Park to see the fireworks every Fourth of July.” When King says “Independence Day,” Camae replies “That right, y’all bougie Black folk call it Independence Day. I can’t seem to quite call it that yet.” Here Hall again presents the class difference between King and Camae here again. By calling King “bougie” Hall lets us know that Camae is definitely from the working class ranks in a closer way than King is. King then tells Camae: “You sho’ll is pretty, Camae.” Camae replies: “that ‘bout the third time you done tole me that.” We see how Hall shows again that noticing the beauty of women was one of King’s main preoccupations. When King feels self conscious about this, Camae replies: “Shuga, shush. You just a man. If I was you, I’d be starin’ at me, too.”
He later has an important debate with Camae about the utility of the tactic of marching in the fight for Black liberation. When King says that Negro folks done seemed to have lost their manners in Detroit, Camae says that if that is the case, she needs to move up there. Camae says that “walking will only get you so far, Preacher Kang.” King replies, “we’re not just walking; we’re marching.” Camae then replies: “whatever it is, it ain’t workin.” King says its not working because of “trifiling Negroes who call themselves using a peaceful protest to get a free color television…We’re marching for a living wage…not a damn color tv! It just gives these police an excuse to shoot innocent folks. Like that boy…that 16 year old boy they shot. Last week? (quietly to himself) Larry Payne. Larry Payne. Larry Payne.” Hall powerfully shows the critique King makes against rioting Blacks who ruin his cause when they try to steal material items. This is an incredibly sympathetic King. Hall’s King wants all Black people to relinquish material items for the greater cause of social justice. He finishes to Camae: “Well, we back [in Memphis] and we gonna do it right this time. So Larry Payne won’t have to have died in vain. Douglas Valentine writes that the day King arrived in Memphis on March 28, 1968, then Governor of Tennessee Buford Ellington called out the Tennessee National Guard. At 2PM that day, Larry Payne, a black high school student was shot and killed by Memphis cops (DiEugenio, ed., 515). The policemen claimed that Payne was attempting to loot a service station on South 3rd Street, and that he attacked them with a butcher knife. We have heard similar falsified reports by police justifying their brutality and murder of unarmed Black men. This, according to Hall, is a murder that King feels on some level responsible for. He is marching with sanitation workers so that their cause is not lost. King talks about how much he feels attacked by the mainstream media. When he hands her a cigarette and she takes it, he notices how she inhales and says: “you smoke like a man.” Camae replies: “you smoke a like a fruit,” to which King says: “aww, Camae don’t use those kinda words…” Camae replies: “what, you root for the fruits?” King says: “indeed I do. Alla God’s children got wings.” We see a side of King that is sympathetic towards gay rights, like his wife faithfully was, throughout her life. We get small clues about who Camae really is throughout this play. When Camae teaches King the way she thinks one ought to smoke, “like its going out of style,” she says she wishes she could take a picture of it. King then asks her if she is with the FBI, to which Camae replies: “Naw. Something bigger.” This is yet another clue about Camae’s identity. Camae tells King if he wants to lead the people he has to smoke like the people. We see the intimacy growing between them in this hotel room. King teaches Camae about the very personal ambitions he has for more rights for sanitation workers. And Camae teaches King how to break the mold of upper class respectability in order to accomplish his ambition of acquiring rights for sanitation workers. When Camae says “walkin’ will only get us so far,” King replies by saying “killin’ will get you hung.” King advocates a more moderate approach in the face of wanton white racist violence. Hall shows us a leader who is not willing to see violence as an effective tactic to fight white racism. Hall shows King breaking class norms and gender norms of respectability most strongly when King directly asks Camae “if you were me, what would you do?” Hall shows how King is challenging the traditional patriarchy of the ministerial organization he belonged to, which was the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), by showing genuine interest in a woman’s ideological opinion. We know from Barbara Ransby’s biography of grassroots organizer Ella Baker that King like other SCLC ministers had problems seeing women in roles other than secretarial. Ransby writes:

A rhetoric of racial equality marked the public pronouncements of SCLC leaders, while old hierarchies based on gender inequities endured within their ranks. Baker refused to accept the situation in silence. She criticized ministerial leaders who came to meetings late and left early, disregarding the inconveniences they caused for the female clerical staff. They expected the women workers to cater to them, Baker complained. Although she never publicly named names, Baker also alluded to unprincipled sexual behavior on the part of some male ministers involved in the movement. She confided to one researcher that certain SCLC ministers would come into the office in the afternoon "after spending the morning at some sister's house doing what they shouldn't have been doing... you see, I know too many stories." The ministers' arrogant assumption that they stood above the moral rules they preached to others cost them Baker's respect as ministers and as men (Ransby, 185).

By showing King’s interest in what Camae would say, Hall shows how King challenged the traditional hierarchy. Yet we know this was motivated on some level by King’s physical attractiveness to Camae. However this raises the question of whether his motives was genuinely softening her to him, or genuinely wanting to know her ideology on this matter of fighting for racial justice. In order to show him what she would do, Camae asks to borrow King’s jacket and to wear his shoes. She then preaches a sermon reminiscent of one by Mother/Sister in Marcus Gardley’s play Every Tongue Confess. The most compelling part of this sermon is that draws most audience attention is the very end. This sermon is also reminiscent of the one by Meridian Henry in James Baldwin’s Blues For Mister Charlie. It deals with the question of how to deal with white racism most directly. In it Camae preaches:

“We have gathered here today to deal with a serious issue...HOW do we deal with the white man? I have told you that the white man is our brother. And he should be treated as such…But it is hard to do this when our brother beats his fist upon our flesh. When he greets us with “Nigger” and “Go back to Africa,” when he punches us in our bellies swelling with hunger…To this I say, my brethren, a new day is coming. I’m sick and tired of being sick and tired, and today is the day that I tell you to KILL the white man! (sotto voice) But not with your hands. Not with your guns. But with your miiiiiiind! (back to regular voice)”

Camae turns this into a comical moment when she proceeds to curse at the end of this, but the significance of this sermon as a literary piece is not only its theme of how clergy teach Blacks how to cope with white racism, it is also significant because this is exactly the message that George Lester Jackson shares that the only way to kill the violence of white supremacy on the lives of Black people is to use one’s mind. To sharpen one’s consciousness. However this important message becomes lost in the comedy that Camae plays up when she curses at the end of this sermon.
King begins to sympathize with her message of fighting back the forces that violently try to stamp out self-determination of Black people. Camae says “last time I heard you was preachin’ ‘everybody the same.’ Negro folk. White folk. We all alike.” King chooses to explain this by saying “we all scared. Scared of each other. Scared of ourselves. They just scared. Scared of losin’ somethin’ that they’ve known their whole lives. Fear makes us human. We all need the same basic things. A hug. A smile.”
King and Camae end up in a well written, well performed, dramatic dispute about how Camae delivered her sermon. This exchange builds the intimacy between these characters. However when Camae asks King how her oratorical skills compare to his, he says “I’m better…Nobody can make it pretty like me. I’ve been doing this for years, darlin.’ Gonna be doin it till the day I die.” When Camae asks if it was good for a woman, King says yes and once again affirms the patriarchal expectations that subjugate a woman’s place below a man’s when it comes to preaching. However when Camae asks if her sermon was good for a man, King replies: “then you’d be Malcolm X.” Camae plays with King and says: “so you callin’ Malcolm X a sissy?” She runs to the room door, opens it, and yells outside the room that Martin is calling Malcolm a sissy. Camae is playing on the supposed feud between the two. She tells Martin that “God liked Malcolm X. And you woulda liked him, too. He didn’t drank. Smoke. Cuss. Or…Cheat. On. His Wife.” Camae means for this line to sink into Martin. When Camae tells King that Malcolm is in heaven, Martin shows some doubt: “I don’t know, now. He talked a lot of…”Truth?” Camae interjects. To this King replies: “A lot of violence. He had a weakness for violent words. Speak by the sword, die by the sword.” Hall shows a Martin Luther King who believed the mainstream narrative about Malcolm X dying by violence because he supposedly preached violence. Manning Marable’s recent biography of Malcolm challenges this mainstream memory of Malcolm. Camae seems to understand better than Hall’s King, perhaps because of her working class experience, that Malcolm spoke by love when he critiqued the colonial relationship that upholds white racist violence against Blacks. She tells King “speak by love, die by hate. We all have weaknesses, Preacher Kang. I’m sho’ you got yo’ own. Just ain’t never let nobody…know. For what it worth, I know God like you. The real you.” Camae corrects King’s misunderstanding of Malcolm’s murder by saying that Malcolm was speaking out of his love for Black people but died, not by his own hatred, but by the hatred of the powers-that-be that paid mercenaries to kill him because he was threatening their colonial order. George Jackson in an April 4, 1970 letter to his lawyer Fay Stender writes:

We were colonized by the white predatory fascist economy. It was from them that we evolved our freak subculture, and the attitudes that perpetuate our conditions. These attitudes cause us to give each other up to the Klan pigs. We even on occasion work gun in hand right with them. A Black killed Fred Hampton; blacks working with the CIA killed Malcolm X…”

When Camae says “die by hate” she is referring to this betrayal by mercenaries that Jackson discusses. The mercenaries, according to Jackson, gave themselves and Malcolm and Martin, up to the Klan pigs. Mercenaries are those who choose to cooperate with the state in a targeted assassination. By discussing Malcolm’s weaknesses, Camae reduces the magnitude of Malcolm’s strategic use of violence in King’s mind. It is no longer a primary direct cause of Malcolm’s death. Instead it is one of many steps, one of which includes the angering of what Jackson calls the “Klan pigs.” The presence of George Jackson’s writings is especially significant in understanding the gulf between Martin and Malcolm and how they’re being presented by Hall. They represent two different ideologies that strove for the same goal of Black freedom. In the play, Martin faces his death as he is organizing sanitation workers on a strike. Malcolm faces his death as he is about to organize revolutionaries on the continent of Africa against European colonization. Both were fighting for the same goal however within two different streams: a Negro revolution and a Black revolution. In Malcolm’s seminal “Message to the Grassroots” on November 10th, 1963, Malcolm articulated the difference between the two: “revolution is bloody, revolution is hostile, revolution knows no compromise, revolution overturns and destroys everything that gets in its way” (Marable, 264). What took place since Martin and Malcolm’s deaths in the sixties was in fact a Negro revolution in terms of Negroes being allowed in higher education and public offices like never before. The Negro revolution brought about the end of the segregated buses in Montgomery, the end of segregated bus travel, the end of formal voting discrimination. However this revolution fell short of what Malcolm was trying to achieve in a Black revolution. A Black revolution required a total redistribution of resources and wealth from the current society. Camae seemed to understand the need for a Black revolution in completely securing the rights of Blacks that have been historically discriminated. In a March 1967 letter to his mother, George Jackson writes:

“you know I have grown very, very tired of talking and listening to talk. King and his kind have betrayed our bosom interests with their demagogic delirium. The poor fool knows nothing of the opposition’s true nature and hasn’t the perception to read and learn by history and past events…That nonviolent theory is practicable in civilized lands among the civilized people, the Asians and the Africans, but a look at European history shows that anything of great value that ever changed hands was taken by force of arms…The depressed peoples of the world are very shortly going to grow tired of being wooed and lulled into passivity and quiet endurance by chromium and neon lights…They’ll come out of their coma with a bloodlust and justified indignation for social injustice that will sweep the asphalt right from under the empire builders” (90).

Like Camae, George Jackson sympathizes with the strategic use of violence to fight against white racist violence. She humanizes Malcolm before Martin and reduces him from the stereotype that the mainstream constructed following his death in order to make him appear crazy for wanting to effectively combat white racist violence. Hall continues to humanize Martin when Camae tells him “I don’t like no man wit’ no smelly feet…Who woulda thunk Dr. Kang got stanky feet. Oooo! And you got holes in yo’ socks, too?” King replies: “you make it easy…to make a man forget about it all. About…all…this…” Camae replies prophetically: “that’s what I’m here for.” After hearing another thunder strike, King, we’re told, “stumbles back in a daze.” We then discover he can’t breathe. He seems to be losing consciousness. Desperately trying to resuscitate him, Camae calls him another name, “Michael! Michael! MICHAEL!! Michael, just breathe!” When King slowly regains consciousness, he asks Camae how she knew to call him that: “that is my name. My childhood name. How do you know my real name? My Christian name?” When Camae does not answer directly, he accuses her of being a spy and tells her to get out. The stage directions tells us: “Enraged. King overturns the furniture, searching for bugs he may have glossed over.” Hall shows how concerned King was about being manipulated by the state whom he assumed uses his weakness—an attractive woman—to derail him from his important work of organizing sanitation workers. He tells Camae: “sending tapes to my wife. Tryin’ to break up my family. Tryin’ to break my spirit!” Camae replies: “Preacher Kang, calm down!” He drags Camae to the door in order to push her out but when he opens the door he sees a wall of snow covering the door way. The stage directions tell us: “a huge gust of wind blows in snow that piles at his feet. He lets go of Camae’s arm. He stands in awe. King is now in panic. He rushes to the phone, hears no dial tone, then the stage directions tell us “he backs himself against the wall.” He is apparently at his wits end. He yells at Camae; “How do you know so much about me!?!? Who in the Hell are you? WHO IN THE HELL ARE YOU? The directions tell us that “Camae blows on the end of a cigarette. It lights up. King stands sunned. Looooong aaaaas beat.”
The stage lighting goes from white to lavender in order to suggest a dramatic shift in the story that Hall is telling. It play from now on takes an ironic twist. Camae tells King she is an angel “in the flesh.” King replies: “I’m not going to Hell am I?” To which Camae replies: “Naw. Naw. Naw. Heaven is where we headed…Believe you me I ain’t want this job. First day? Bring over you? The Kang? I ain’t wanna do it. But God been gettin’ these prayers from a littlun named Bunny.” Camae reveals that her role in King’s life is to transition King from the earthly plain to the spiritual plain. The Bunny Camae is referring to is Martin Luther King’s youngest daughter Bernice, who is a preacher based in Atlanta. King then talks about the fear he faces: “I have felt fear…My insides churned and I fought hard to keep them from leaping out of my mouth. You see, a Negro man is not safe in a pulpit. Not even in a pulpit of his own making. Sunday mornings have been the mornings when I am most afraid. Cause in this country a pulpit is a pedestal and we all know that in America, the tall tree is felled first. Tall trees have more wood to born, Camae. We are the sacrifice.” Hall is able to write a King that speaks in the customary metaphors of his memorable speeches. Tall trees are distinguished from other trees because they speak the truth in terms of denouncing imperialist projects, such as the anti-gay legislation that white Americans evangelicals push in Uganda. By typing himself as a “Negro,” preacher, Martin is also affirming Malcolm’s 1963 Message to the Grassroots by suggesting he would rather a Negro revolution than a Black one, which does not fundamentally change the structure, colonial relationship, nor wealth distribution in society, but simply allows more people of color access to it.
Hall shows a very mortal, very human struggle in King when he begins to resist her orders to go with her. Camae says: “Tomorrow. When it time, you gone have to take my hand.” To this King replies: “Tomorrow? But I’m not ready to die.” King fights Camae and God, in order to finish the speech that he quoted at the beginning of this play: “Well, I gots to finish my sermon and I need to be alone to finish my sermon so…you gone have to fly on away.” Camae replies: “Preacher Kang, now you/ gone have to put that down.” To this King issues a reply that George Jackson himself would have made about the inhumanity of the U.S. occupation of Vietnam: “A country that sends its boys to bathe little-bitty brown babies in the blood of our green is headed for a crossroads of conscience.” While he writes and delivers more lines from he wants to be his next sermon, Camae interrupts at each line, once saying: “Preacher Kang, you makin’ my job harder.” Then King replies: “Hard on YOU? What about it bein’ hard on me? On my family? On Corrie? On the movement? HAS GOD THOUGHT ABOUT THAT? [caps in Hall’s original]” Here we see the very real personal battle King has with his own mortality. This is perhaps what makes Samuel L. Jackson’s performance so powerful. As an audience member, I am able to witness and appreciate the very personal struggle King has with leaving his work so soon, leaving his family so soon, leaving the struggle for racial justice so soon. He tells Camae: “We still got work to do. I got more sermons in me, more goals, more…plans!...I wanna make this one a reality! The plan. It’s all in the works. It’s called the Poor People’s Campaign!” After Camae sits and listens to King’s plan to have a poor people’s march on the Washington mall, she says: “Yo men’ll carry it on.” King says: “But I’m the leader of this movement. The head of the body.” To this Camae says: “Well, the body will just have to grow another head ‘cause Memphis is the end of the road for you.” After appealing to her by trying to convince Camae of the importance of his plans, King tries another direction. He points to the plight of society and makes incredibly important connections between the U.S. occupation of peoples of color around the world and the colonized condition of American Blacks inside the U.S.: “how can we fight the war in Vietnam but not the wars against Negroes in our streets? How can we try to put a man on the moon, but not feed starving children in Mississippi? There’s just so much I gotta do. So much I haven’t yet accomplished. So much…I GOTTA FINISH WHAT I STARTED!!” This connection King makes between the oppressed peoples of Vietnam and those in the U.S. is a crucially important one that George Jackson refers to in his June 4, 1970 letter to Angela Davis:

“Do you know the secret police go to great lengths to murder and consequently silence every effective Black person the moment he attempts to explain to the ghetto that our problems are historically and strategically tied to the problems of all colonial people? This means that they are watching you closely…Its no coincidence that Malcolm X and M.L. King died when they did. Malcolm X had just put it together…I seriously believe King knew all along but was holding out and presenting the truth in such a way that it would affect the most people situationally without getting them damaged by gunfire. You remember what was on his [King’s] lips when he died. Vietnam and economics, political economy.”

Katori Hall shows us that this indeed is what was on King’s lips: making connections between the oppressed people in Vietnam to the oppressed people in the cities of the U.S. Despite the power of this important anti-imperialist ambition, Camae, convinces King that her ambition of taking King from the human plane to the spiritual plane is more important. King then says he because he’s had the favor of God this far, that he should be allowed to stay longer instead of leaving the human plane with Camae. Camae agrees: “I done read yo’ blessings file. It bigger than yo’ FBI file and bigga than the Bible. I know it might be hard for you to leave this life…yo family…and all yo plans. But you gone have to pass off that baton little man. You in a relay race, albeit the fastest runner we done ever seen’t. But you ‘bout to burn out, super star. You gone need to pass off that baton…” King still resists. Camae calls, what the directions tell us “a really long phone number.” She first talks to “St. Augustine” and asks him to speak to God, we discover that Hall has genderized God: “What She doing? [Hall capitalizes the “s” in “she”].” Based on the audience’s reaction, this looks like a comic relief of the show. Hall is playing with the audience’s reverence and respectability of God. On one hand Hall challenges the idea that God is so far above that he does not care nor know about the details and inner workings of each of our lives. On the other hand, Hall is supporting the idea that God is compassionate and can take any form, including the form of a Black woman with an attitude who intends to teach humility to an articulate prophet in a Martin Luther King Jr. When Camae tells King that St. Augustine is going to get “her,” God, on the cell, King shows his 1968 sensibilities and asks what a “cell” is. Camae says “it’s like…a phone that ain’t got no cord.” When God comes on the line to speak to Camae, she tells God: “Well, there’s a bit of a problem. He say he ain’t ready. That what I told him. I know…I know…I KNOW.” When Camae gives the phone to King to speak to God, King says:

“you don’t sound like I thought you’d sound. No, no, no. Pardon me, if that offends. I like how you sound. Kinda like my grandmamma…You see I have always listened to you, honored your word, lived by your word…(he lowers his voice) for the most part (raises it back to normal) God, please don’t strike me down for asking this, but…I want to live. I have plans. Lots of plans in my head and in my heart and my people need me. They need me. And I need to see them to the Promised Land. I know that’s not what I said earlier tonight, I know, but…I wasn’t lying exactly (he looks at Camae) I just didn’t know she was comin’ so, so…soon…There have been many a nights when I have held my tongue when it came to You. But not tonight, NOT TONIGHT. I have continuously put my life on the line, gave it all up. Gave it all up for You and Your word. You told me, that I’d be safe. Safe in your arms. You protected me all this time, all this time! Glued a pair of wings to my back, but now that I’ve flown too close to the sun I’m falling into the ocean of death. God how dare you take me now. NOW! I beg of you. I plead—God? Ma’am? God?”
Long heavy silence.

Camae asks King what God said and King said he thinks she hung up. Apparently Hall’s God is not ready to hear or condone non compliance with King. King concluded: “God hung up on me. She forsook her servant.” Camae replies: “She ain’t forsake you neither. She just ain’t wanna hear yo shit. She got the right. She is God, ya know?” King and Camae descend into a playful pillowfight. Here we see what an hour within a room does for physical intimacy between King and Camae. The directions tell us: “he finally somehow pins Camae onto her back. He is on top of her. They stop. Gazing into each other’s eyes. Out of breath. A bit sweaty.” King soon says to Camae: “Hold me.” The next stage directions tell us: “Beat. King’s eyes well with tears and this strong grown man dissolves into the child no one ever saw. He slides down on top of her. Crying. Crying his heart out. Sobbing. And Camae holds him. And rubs his back as if he were a child.” Here King seems to realize his own mortality at this moment. Especially when he tells Camae: “I never wanted to do this. I just wanted to be a minister in my small church.” We know this is true, especially from Timothy Tyson’s biography of Robert F. Williams, which tells us that E.D. Nixon was largely responsible for recruiting Martin Luther King to preach at the Montgomery Bus Boycott (116). Camae shows an understanding of this however tells King clearly: “when your maker calls you, you must heed the call.” To this King says: “I just wanted to be a minister. That was enough. That was enough…” Camae replies: “But God had bigger plans for you.” When King asks why him, Camae says to him: “why not you?” King then tries to do all important things in his mind that he deems important, from leaving his men instructions to calling his wife. He starts going over in his mind all the things that he thought he should have done to be a better father or a better husband. This is perhaps my favorite part of the play. Because you see the powerful within the most personal thoughts of King that Hall imagines. Camae consoles him: “you did what you had to do. We needed you. The world needed you.” King is moved by his doubts: “I don’t know for what! I’ve sacrificed my marriage, my family. My health, for what?” Camae then calls King a saint but he does not accept the title and says that if Camae is an angel, then “God must ‘a been impressed with how you’ve lived your life.” Camae said that no, God wasn’t. We then get a beautiful monologue, by the end of which not only is the actress Angela Bassett crying, but so is some audience members. We now discover how Camae gets to the place where she is at the moment now, of having to take Dr. King to the other side:

“I’ve cursed. But what I’m ashamed of most is I’ve hated. Hated myself. Sacrificed my flesh so that others might feel whole again. I thought it was my duty. All that I had to offer this world. What else was a poor Black woman, the mule of the world, here for? Last night, in the back of a alley I breathed my last breath. A man clasped his hands like a necklace ‘round my throat. I stared into his big blue yes, as my breath got ragged and raw and I saw the Hell this old world had put him through. The time he saw his father hang a man. The time he saw his mother raped. I felt so sorry for him. I saw what the world had done to him, and I still couldn’t forgive. I hated him for stealing my breath. When I passed on to the other side…I was just a cryin’ weepin’ at her feet. Beggin’ her not to throw me down. All that sinnin’. All that grime on my soul. All that hatred in my heart. But then I looked up and saw that She was smilin’ down at me. She opened her mouth, and silence came out. But I heard her loud and clear. ‘I got a special task for you and if you complete it, all your sins will be washed away. I opened my file. And I saw my task was you. What could little old me, give to big old you? I thought you was gone be perfect. Well, you ain’t, but then you are. You have the biggest heart I done ever knownt. You have the strength to love those who could never love you back. If I had just a small fraction of love you have for this world, then maybe, just maybe I could become half the angel you are” (65).

King then asks Camae whether he will die at the at the hands of a white man too, and she says: “yes. Speak by love. Die by hate.” Hall speaks to the ways that individuals allow themselves to be used by mercenaries to carry out hateful acts of murder, the way Camae’s murderer did. Memphis citizen Olivia Castling, who heard the fatal shot that killed King and witnessed the escape by the murderer said that the man she saw running from the scene of the crime was NOT James Earl Ray, “because the gentleman [she] saw was heavier than Ray” (DiEugenio, ed., 492). While Hall’s play does not challenge the mainstream narrative we get about King’s murder committed by James Earl Ray, it does raise issues about how King’s murder was motivated by hate. James W. Douglass’ investigative work challenges this mainstream narrative particularly in his article “The King Conspiracy Exposed in Memphis.” He writes that in December 1999, a Memphis jury concluded that Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated by a conspiracy that involved a Memphis bar and grill owner named Loyd Jowers and “others including governmental agencies” (479). Jowers said that he had been asked to help in the murder of King and was told that there would be a decoy in the plot. The decoy was apparently James Earl Ray. Jowers said that the man who asked him to help in the murder was a Mafia connected produce dealer named Frank Liberto. Liberto had a courier deliver $10,000 for Jowers to hold at his restaurant…Jowers said he was visited the day before by a man named Raul, who brought a rifle in a box. Douglass quotes Lavada Addison who said that Liberto told her that he “had Martin Luther King killed.” Jowers said that the meetings to plan the assassination happened at Jim’s Grill. The planners included undercover Memphis Police Department officer Marrell McCullough, who is African American. According to witness Coby Vernon Smith, McCullough had infiltrated a Memphis community organizing group, the Invaders, which was working with the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Andrew Young, who witnessed the assassination, can be heard on tape identifying McCullough as the man kneeling beside King’s body on the balcony in a famous photograph. Later in the April 4, 1970 letter to his lawyer, George Jackson writes:

“We are so confused, so foolishly simple that we not only fail to distinguish what is generally right and what is wrong, but we also fail to appreciate what is good and not good for us in very personal matters concerning the Black colony and its liberation. The ominous government economic agency whose only clear motive is to further enslave, number, and spy on us, the Black agency subsidized by the government to infiltrate us and retard liberation, is accepted, and by some, even invited and welcome, while the Black Panther is avoided and hard pressed to find protection among the people.”

According to Douglass’ investigation, the Black agency subsidized in this case appears to be the Memphis based Invaders group, through which the larger government agency was able to send McCullough, and direct McCullough to direct King to be in the right position to be shot on April 4, 1968. By Jackson’s standard, McCullough is definitely one of those who are “so foolishly simple” that he failed to distinguish what is generally right and wrong. By participating in the killing of King, McCullough provides truth to Camae’s claim to King that he would die by hate.
A more interesting story I think would be a play exploring the motives and spiritual forces behind those who assassinated King himself. Because then audiences can be prepared an important way to fight those forces which seem to dominate this world. James Douglass interviewed an FBI agent Donald Wilson who said that “H.L. Hunt, an influential Dallas oil billionaire had been a friend of J. Edgar Hoover since the early 1950s. Both men hated Martin Luther King…Hoover argued that the only way to stop King would be to ‘completely silence’ him. After King’s murder, Hunt told Curington [his chief aide] that Hoover had won the argument” (486). George Jackson writes in Blood In My Eye that that “the ruling class in the U.S. is composed of one million men and their families—the Rockefellers, Vanderbilts, Morgans, Mellons, Du Ponts, Hunts and Gettys, Fords and their minions and dependents. They use ivy league universities and elite law schools as private schools for their offspring and as training grounds for their corporate hirelings. They rule with iron precision through the military, the C.I.A., the F.B.I., private foundations and financial institutions. Their control of all the media of education and communication comprises an extremely effective system of thought control” (Jackson, 169-70). David Murphy in King’s 1999 Memphis trial said that his close friend J.D. Hill had confessed to him that he had been a member of an Army Sniper team in Memphis assigned to “an unknown target” on April 4th. A lot of what George Jackson has written, even while he was in prison, about the death of Martin Luther King, has panned out to be true. King’s prophetic anti-imperialist message was threatening the wealth expropriated by Hunt through white racist violence of indigenous people. Therefore, the powers that be, namely Hunt, wanted King dead and that’s what they got. The powers that be including Hunt also got an extraordinary narrative to cover up the truth behind the murder of King.
Hall’s play teaches us that Martin Luther King, Jr. took his death in a brave way that teaches all of us about the importance of humility regarding our own mortality. Hall’s play also exposes the white racist violence motivated by a hatred that wishes to continue white racist violence by killing Blacks who resist the white supremacist system and leaving alive only those who will happily work within it. The 1999 case in Memphis which rightfully concluded that King was killed by a government conspiracy was in effect carried out in a way that George Jackson accurately articulated no less than two years after King’s actual murder: “with iron precision through the military.” In an April 11, 1968 letter to his father George Jackson wrote about King:

“I never really disliked him as a man…It is just as a leader of Black thought that I disagreed with him. The concept of nonviolence is a false ideal. It presupposes the existence of compassion and a sense of justice on the part of one’s adversary. When this adversary has everything to lose and nothing to gain by exercising justice and compassion, his reaction can only be negative. The symbol of the male here in North America has always been the gun, the knife, the club. Violence is extolled at every exchange: the TV, the motion pictures, the best-seller lists. The newspapers that sell best are those that carry the boldest, bloodiest headlines and most sports coverage…The Kings, Wilkinses, and Youngs exhort us to ‘put away your knives, put away your arms, and clothe yourselves in the breastplate of righteousness’ and ‘turn the other cheek to prove our capacity to endure, to love.’ Well, that is good for them perhaps but I most certainly need both sides of my head.”

In a later 12/28/69 letter to his brother Jonathan, Jackson rejects belief in “backward stuff about God…It is a labored, mindless attempt to explain away ignorance, a tool to keep people of low mentality and no means of production in line…a thing for imbeciles and only women and, of course, Negroes.” Hall’s play certainly rejects this. Hall’s play assumes a knowledge and respect for a God who has finite time for each of us to be on this planet. Both works make important analyses about the times in which we live. Hall’s play encourages to accept our own mortality whereas Jackson’s letters encourages to fight very hard to make that mortality meaningful for the rest of humanity. We cannot simply assume and condone white racist violence.
The play ends with King eventually getting his wish of seeing the Promised Land, up on the Mountaintop. In his April 3, 1968 sermon King says “I may not make it there with you.” But in Hall’s play, we as the audience go exactly there with him and it is Camae who tells us as a refrain at the end of each stanza that: “the baton passes on.” Hall imaginatively creates the Promised Land, this Mountaintop, “made of the dreams of men and women who have paid the ultimate price with their lives.” Hall addresses directly young people of color within the Negro revolution producing-Broadway audience when she has King say: “The children of Nile you must rise, as you can no longer walk weary through this world with willowed backs. Your time is now, I tell you NOW!!!” This resonates with Judge Joe Brown’s remarks made in 1998. Brown ruled on the case of the King murder in Memphis in the mid nineties. This is the same Judge Joe Brown with a television show, who concluded that the cartridge case that the state claims killed King, actually didn’t. Brown said: “The reason we must go forward and resolve this murder is for the children…to protect this new generation from this type of response by the system we must expose” (DiEugenio, ed., 470). Hall’s play aims to empower young people by showing the dear sacrifices, the dear personal costs one must give up in order to fearlessly speak truth to power. At the end of Hall’s play, King is at the mountaintop imploring young people to come by “passing the baton.” The baton represents continuing the anti-imperialist cause. We continue King’s message by speaking out against a nation that chooses spiritual death by choosing to spend more on military programs than on programs of social uplift. It also includes not paying homage to the ways in which this anti-imperialist message is watered down by the corporate powers that be that erect monuments. These monuments distract us from fulfilling King’s message of opposing military interventions at the cost of “starving children” in the United States. These corporations like GE, Bank of America, JP Morgan and others believe they could advance their imperial agenda and pay homage to King by erecting a monument all at the same time. A close examination of King’s life, Hall’s play and George Jackson’s letters tell us this is not true: we cannot avoid the terror that waits us while we continue an imperialist path. We cannot avoid it by erecting monuments without addressing the root cause that King died. We can only address this by ending all military occupations in foreign countries.
King fought for sanitation workers, but his life and death also allowed the place for many Negroes to enter public office and higher education. He was a martyr of the Negro revolution. Katori Hall tells us he was brave because he boldly, consciously decided to accept the end of the task that God called him to. He was choosing to trust God to in fact to have vengeance in God’s way, and not his own way. This is an important lesson. However this Negro revolution we’ve seen since his death has still fell short of Malcolm X’s Black revolution that would have opened the door for meaningful change that both worked towards. Since King’s death, the powers-that-be like Hunt have propagandized their mainstream narratives about Malcolm X and King, and have continued their path, in King’s prophetic words “to hell.” Each of us must decide which role we will play on this path. –RF.

The completion of this review was made possible by many. Originally, Cynthia McKinney for mentioning James DiEugenio to me on August 26th of this year. Kim Holder for mentioning the importance of George Jackson’s writings to me on October 14th of this year. And for Chelsea Nachman for the opportunity on October 22nd to see and read Katori Hall’s play.

REFERENCES
James M. Washington, ed. A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings of Martin Luther King, Jr. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1986.

James DiEugenio and Lisa Peace, eds. The Assassinations: Probe Magazine on JFK, MLK, RFK, and Malcolm X. Introduction by Judge Joe Brown. Los Angeles: Feral House, 2003.

Barbara Ransby, Ella Baker and the Black Freedom Movement: A Radical Democratic Vision. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003.

Soledad Brother: The Prison Letters of George Jackson. Introduction by Jean Genet. New York: Bantam, 1970.

George L. Jackson, Blood in My Eye. Baltimore: Black Classic Press, 1990.

Thursday, November 3, 2011

my interview with Richard Newman about Richard Allen




This evening I had the pleasure of interviewing Richard Newman, Professor of History at the Rochester Institute of Technology about his very important biography FREEDOM'S PROPHET: BISHOP RICHARD ALLEN, THE AME CHURCH, AND THE BLACK FOUNDING FATHERS. You can hear our interview in the embedded MP3 player below. This book has special significance to me because as a soon-to-be official member of Mother Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church, I am honored to be part of an institution by a founding father like Richard Allen who took Black self-determination so seriously. He really saw the beauty of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and rightfully divorced it from racism in the American context. In an important way. The Gospel of Jesus Christ for Richard Allen is not and should not be influenced or adulterated by American white racism. Newman's discussion of how Richard Allen fought very hard to keep his original church out of the grip of white racism is remarkable to me; a brilliant testament to the power of God and the power of the Gospel, and what the Gospel can do. I was intrigued to learn about Richard Allen's Pan African beliefs, namely his support of Paul Cuffee and his support Black emigration to Haiti. I think fondly of a February 28th, 2011 sermon by Reverend Mark Kelly Tyler where he talked about how our Black founding fathers and mothers (like Frances Ellen Watkins Harper) planted seeds to trees that they would not see the fruit of. This is true for Richard Allen. He fought very hard to see the abolition of slavery come to fruition. While he did not see it in his lifetime, however, he did plant the seeds necessary for abolition happening thirty to forty years after his transition in 1831. Perhaps one of the most important sentences Newman writes in this biography, which I read in its entirety, is WOULD INTERRACIAL ACTIVISM EVER LEAD TO BLACK EQUALITY, OR WAS BLACK AUTONOMY AN END IN AND OF ITSELF? I think Newman in his biography believed that Allen on some level believed that interracial activism would lead to Black equality, as Newman's research on Allen's work with the Pennsylvania Abolition Society shows. However Newman's writing of Allen's support for African American emigration to Haiti and Canada also shows how he still believed that Black autonomy an end in and of itself. We see Richard Allen in all his complexity and power. Thank you, Richard Newman. -RF.

Saturday, October 8, 2011

My review of Elizabeth Nunez's Boundaries





In Boundaries, a sequel to Anna In-Between, Elizabeth Nunez presents an important story about a protagonist’s professional struggle to publish literary fiction by Black writers in a commercial book industry that is more interested in pushing white supremacist propaganda than in actually selling books. The protagonist, Anna, is editor of Equiano books. Equiano is an imprint of Windsor, a large publishing company devoted to printing books by and about Black people. Anna fights the assumptions Windsor makes about their “niche” audience when her boss at Windsor Tanya Foster decides to market to a Black audience by using sexually explicit advertisements that degrade the meaning of the novel. Nunez’s narrator tells us: “she has been disregarded, disrespected. They did not consult her…It’s the same book, Tanya said. But it will never be read as the same book, Anna knows. Readers who are interested in literary fiction will pass over a book with such a sexually explicit cover. Readers who simply want to be entertained and not challenged will discard it after the first page when the sentences become too complex…when the ideas they are invited to ponder are too complicated” (57). Nunez shows how the publishing industry represented by Windsor assumes their Black readership belongs in the latter group and creates a niche market more by their arbitrary choices to create that market rather than trying to cater a market for literary fiction.
Along with her professional life, Anna as a Caribbean migrant in Brooklyn, New York, also manages a personal life in ways that mirror her struggle against the publishing industry. She tries to maintain a healthy relationship with her parents Beatrice and John who are coping with the diagnosis and treatment of Beatrice’s breast tumors. After much resistance, Beatrice is convinced to leave her island home, which is described (but not named) as Trinidad, for treatment of these tumors. However Anna has reservations about Beatrice and John staying with her in New York, mainly because she still struggles with resentment over her mother Beatrice never showing her any affection: “They are kind to each other, but they do not touch, they do not say affectionate words to each other…She [Anna] blames the colonial times. The Queen of England was not demonstrative” (108).
Anna also tries to retain hope in the possibility of a committed loving relationship with surgeon Paul Bishop even while she reflects on the reasons for her bitter divorce from her ex-husband Tony. The narrator tells us: “it’s hard to be stylish or to laugh when in the third year of your marriage your husband loses his job, when your income spirals down and you can no longer keep up with the payments for the expensive condo your husband bought, or the Benz he liked to drive” (95). Her friend Paula has long decided that “the bridge between immigrants and Americans born in America is a wobbly one” (115). She attributes Anna’s divorce to her not heeding her advice that she “should not have married out of her culture” (146). Paula also explains Beatrice’s lack of affection to being part of a time “when women rarely revealed their true feelings…too much coddling will give their daughters false expectations of opportunities that in reality will be available only to men” (146-7). However Anna’s reflection on her experience with Alice, another immigrant with whom Anna stayed in the States for the first time, convinces her that Paula is wrong: “She had stuck with her own kind and her own kind was not good to her. Lisa [a white co-worker of Anna’s], far removed from her own kind, had been good to her” (198).
Beatrice tries to develop a relationship between Anna and Paul Bishop, surgeon and son of Henry Bishop the beloved union organizer who holds Anna’s father John in high regard. They develop a relationship however, as Nunez suggests, not strictly because they are from the Caribbean, but because of Anna’s growth that came about from her struggles against the demands of the publishing industry, her mother, her ex-husband, and her friend. As relationship with Paul develops, Equiano is being dismantled because Windsor is merging with another company and has now become TeaHouse Press. Anna learns that Tim Greene, the African American co-worker who was initially assigned to be her assistant editor by Tanya at Equiano, is now her boss at TeaHouse. Nunez shows a fundamental issue of integration when Black men and women like Greene are placed in positions that uphold white supremacy with a Black face. Tim Greene justifies the use of these sexually explicit advertisement to a “niche” Black audience: “We can design print, electronic, and television advertisements targeted to specific groups” (169). Anna resents Tim’s participation in the white mainstream industry’s plan to create a “niche” Black audience by turning the art of reading into strictly an act of entertainment instead of potential reform. The narrator tells us that according to Anna: “He [Tim] and too many like him seem to lack faith in the possibility of remedying an inferior education, of resetting the clock for young men and women whose deficiencies in reading and writing have accumulated after years of neglect…these are the underprivileged youth whose notion of the good life will remain limited unless expanded by good books that could open the way for them to the beauties of the world” (220).
She concludes that if she stays at the now TeaHouse press, she will have to yield to Tim Greene’s racist vision. When Anna considers leaving TeaHouse press and relays her struggles with Tim to her father John and Paul, they both advise her to stay at her job at TeaHouse. This response to me however seems like a cop-out and neglects the various possibilities, especially with the Internet, that Anna could have used to engage a Black literary authorship and readership. Anna’s struggle for reaching this authorship and readership is representative of the need for such audiences especially after the end of the periodicals Emerge and Black Issues Book Review. Nunez ends the novel on a hopeful note with Anna’s personal life being salvaged; Paul proposes marriage, and she says that while she has to wait longer for racial justice in publishing industry, her kids, conceivably with Paul, will not have to wait. I personally don’t know about that. The relationship between Nunez’s Equiano and Windsor reflects several actual publishers we see today between Amistad and HarperCollins; OneWorld and Random House; Atria and Simon & Schuster. The larger publishers that own these imprints have significant holdings in other media industries. What Nunez shows in Boundaries is the potential for any of these mainstream publishers to do what Windsor has done and by allowing a merger with a larger company in order to neglect a Black literary authorship and readership.
In my mind, the boundaries that Nunez is referring to the boundaries within the white mind about the capacity of the Black mind, which has resulted in her struggles with her ex-husband Tony and an intraracial struggle with her new boss Tim Greene. The struggles against these boundaries are what make Anna a sympathetic, complete character. I happen to disagree with the responses of John Sinclair and Paul Bishop to Anna’s situation with Tim Greene. I thought that John Sinclair was absolutely too deferential to the so called way things are in the U.S. He told her that African Americans “paid a heavy price for the opportunities immigrants of color have today” and because of that, Anna should not challenge Tim Greene (240). I agree with the heavy price. Charlayne Hunter Gault and Hamilton Holmes opened the way for my father, a Jamaican immigrant to attend and graduate from the University of Georgia in 1975. However I do not agree that because of this Caribbean immigrants like Anna should shut their mouths and go along to get along the way that John Sinclair has told his daughter in Nunez’s novel. I disagree with John Sinclair’s advice very strongly. I thought that John should have told Anna to continue seeing authors on her own dime and to start a new venue for creating an authorship and readership that respects our rich Black literary readership and authorship. People from the Caribbean have been influencing racial justice work in the United States for a long time, and I would hope that John Sinclair would have been more sensitive to such influence, such as that of Malcolm X, whose mother came from Grenada; such as that of James Weldon Johnson and Rosamond Johnson, whose mother came from Bahamas; such as Marcus Garvey, Amy Jacques Garvey and Amy Ashwood Garvey whose parents came from Jamaica; such as Hubert Harrison, whose mother came from Barbados and whose father came from St. Croix; such as Z. Alexander Looby and Stokely Carmichael whose parents came from Trindad. And the list goes on. These are people who came to this country and developed very sophisticated opinions about race and used them to advance the struggle for racial justice in this country. And I don’t agree with John Sinclair that just because African Americans paid a heavy price that his daughter Anna should defer to Tim Greene just because he is African American. No. Wrong is wrong. Anna in my opinion was entirely in her right to challenge his attempt to condone what apparently was the larger mainstream publishing company’s attempt to force a niche market of oversexualized Black people that turn reading into solely a pleasurable or entertaining act rather than a more literary one. I was a bit miffed by Nunez’s ending of this last novel, but more than anything, I applaud her on a phenomenally written novel that exposes the problem of the mainstream publishing industry and its insistence on creating rather than respecting a Black audience. –RF.

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Reflections on Ahmadinejad, Democracy Now, Libya, and the Dangers of Liberalism



Reflections on Ahmadinejad, Democracy Now, Libya, and the Dangers of Liberalism.

ON AHMADINEJAD

I was honored to be invited by former U.S. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney to attend a dinner hosted by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran last Tuesday, September 20th at the Warwick Hotel on 56th Street in New York City. There was an opportunity for various American groups to speak after Ahmadinejad spoke. I took notes on the statements by various groups represented at this dinner, which included the International People’s Democratic Uhuru Movement, and Black Agenda Report. At this dinner was a very important cross section of the Black or African American press, particularly the anti-imperialist press that works to resist foreign military occupations that deprive those occupied peoples of basic needs such as education and healthcare. Before groups from this important cross section spoke, Ahmadinejad himself spoke, in Farsi with an English translator. He spoke on how the humanity of this world is facing a crisis and how leadership in particular countries should be in the service of humanity.

Then on behalf of the International Action Center, Ramsey Clark spoke about the role of the U.S. in dominating Iran. He said we have a huge war machine that we its citizens have permitted our country to build: “the U.S. has to reduce its budget by 90% or there’ll be no peace on earth.” Finally Clark said that the machine right now is replacing the leader in Syria with one more friendly to their interests and next up, was Iran.

Brenda Stokely, president of AFSCME Local 215 in New York City said: “when we went to Durban, we represented a fight for peace.” This was important for me to hear because the U.N. Conference Against Racism is taking place this month in New York which the White House has boycotted, due to Israeli pressure. She also said that we must have a movement that is connected to people’s human rights, and that we must make the heads of state know that they must talk to the people everyday who are laboring for peace and justice. Just because the mainstream American media ignores people like myself and Brenda Stokely does not mean that we are not here.

I next heard Orthodox Jewish Rabbis who are against the state of Israel speak. A representative of this group, whose name I did not catch, said that “one of the commands of the Torah is to reside in peace with others. Iran is a most exemplary example of this…Judaism and Zionism are different. True Jews have nothing to do with Zionism.” I had a conversation with a dear friend of mine about the support of this group of rabbis days after this dinner, and she said that their protest of the U.S. interests in invading Iran is disingenuous because while they critique the state, they still reap all of the benefits of it. This reminds me of liberalism, and its perils. As Lorraine Hansberry said, it is not enough to live in American society and simply be a liberal. To live a meaningful life, it is necessary in American society to be a radical. At this point in my life at 31, I feel like if I am a liberal, I am still reaping the benefits of the exploitative colonial relationship this American society sets up between whites and Blacks. Whites who are able to enjoy employment, census counts, tax benefits, at the expense of Blacks, an increasing number of whom are incarcerated. Governor Corbett is showing me more clearly, than maybe any other governor, that white wealth is based on control of Black bodies, very much like the time of the Middle Passage. Republicans make no bones about wanting to expand the industry of incarcerating bodies of color and consequently push vouchers and charter schools that will leave the majority of children of color without an adequate education that will set them up to eventually get incarcerated.
My listening to this September 20th talk by Ahmadinejad taught me that I cannot in good faith be a liberal because its way too close ideologically to the forces intending on sending this empire to a speedy decline via their capitalist greed and hypermilitarization. I’ll pass, thank you.

Also in this group that spoke before Ahmadinejad was a member of the Mennonite Church. He said that one of their central tenets is their refusal to participate in wars. I appreciated his point that our religions have frequently been used to justify wars, hatred, violence and terrorism. As a Christian, I believe that by not speaking out against these wars, our government will continue to kill thousands or millions more for the expansion of the American empire. This Mennonite Church members also said that God is above all nations: “the prophets have taught us that God will judge us according to how we treated the poor.” One of those prophets is Malcolm X who, according to Marable’s recent biography, challenged the imperialism of Truman when he wrote to him protesting the Korean invasion in 1950. He also continually spoke about how the U.S. would lose in Vietnam because of its imperialist tendency.

The issuance of all the Pentagon Papers this year proves that the nation’s stated reasons for bombing Vietnam, the Gulf of Tonkin Resoultion, was essentially false. Another one of those prophets Martin Luther King Jr. said at Riverside Church in 1967 that “a nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.” Obama has pledged more money than ever to the Pentagon and though he claims to be a Christian, is in practice betraying the message and the Gospel of Christ. I wish Obama would stop trying to put Jesus back on the cross.

Saladdin Muhammad from Black Voices For Justice also spoke. One of his points was that this culture of war has impacted the thinking of our young people. He later said that one of these tests to prove how American you are, is whether you will fight in a war. Muhammad questioned the whole purpose of fighting a war for the U.S., especially as a person of color being pitted against another person of color, so a white man can reap the profits from a natural resource from an indigenous people. His comments seem to bring to mind this root basis of American imperialism. He ended his words by calling for a reaffirmation of the Durban Declaration Programme of Action. This seems to be the only document in Western history, according to Naomi Klein’s article “Minority Death Match” that has called slavery and the transatlantic slave trade a “crime against humanity.”

See: http://www.zcommunications.org/minority-death-match-jews-blacks-and-the-post-racial-presidency-by-naomi-klein

Barbara Lee went to great gains to modify this document to a version that she thought the U.S. would approve: she eliminated all references to Zionism especially those that equated it with racism. Yet the U.S. still declined to attend in 2009 in Switzerland at a conference recognizing this Durban Declaration. I am grateful that Muhammad reaffirmed the importance of this document.

At this dinner Eleanor Ommani, on behalf of the American Iranian Friendship Committee spoke on the importance of Iran reserving a right to purchase nuclear energy under the supervision of the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] and she also called for the “the ending of unjust sanctions.” She later said “the U.S. must cease in interfering in Afghanistan.”

I especially appreciated the words of Nihad Awad from the CARE who called for a group of American journalists to work together to prevent the demonization of Islam and Iran. I believe that this was particularly important.

I also appreciated hearing the words of Omali Yeshitela, chairman of the International People’s Democratic Uhuru Movement speak. There was a previous comment apologizing for Obama’s warmongering on behalf of the U.S. nation. Yeshitela responded by saying we should not be apologizing for Obama any more than Ahmadinejad should be apologizing for the behavior of the shah of Iran. Yeshitela spoke to the importance of continually fighting imperialism and mentioned what I believe will be a very important antiwar protest on November 5th here in Philadelphia: http://www.blackisbackcoalition.org/nov5)

When Ahmadinejad spoke, he mentioned the Iranian hiker hostages and said they will be freed very soon. In fact they were freed within the week since I attended this dinner. However they’re being freed overshadowed the mainstream media coverage of the painful murder of Troy Davis by the state of Georgia. I think Troy Davis is a reminder of the fundamental white racist struggle in the U.S. and how the racial struggle continues to trump every other struggle. Obama declined to intervene; in a similar fashion he declined to participate in the U.N. Conference Against Racism; and declined to support Palestine in their U.N. bid for statehood. Ahmadinejad in his statement said that the most fundamental shared value—for all humans—is humanity: “we will only be left with one truth—the truth of humanity.” He was speaking in my mind to what constitutes “humane behavior.” Allowing a war industry to thrive the way myself and other Americans have done is not humane behavior. Dropping 30,000 bombs on Libya is not humane behavior. Condoning the deaths of at least 50,000 Libyans is not humane behavior.

See: http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/02/30000-bombs-over-libya/

Ahmadinejad was not naming any country in his talk but he essentially was. He said: “there are only two currents: divine and evil. The divine tool used against evil is the human being. The chance was given to humans to absorb all that is divine: kindness, mercy, love.” As a Christian, I can relate to this, and I can respect the Islamic values that bear almost all in common with Christianity. I respect many people of the Islamic faith, particularly Malcolm X. I saw Ahmadinejad’s speech as an implicit and necessary critique against the rapacious foreign policy of the United States. He said: “Anyone who wishes to be divine must be committed to humanity.” He then compared Christianity to Islam and showed how the first standards of being a Christian or Muslim is basically the same: one must show that one is committed to humankind or how they handle the dignity of humans. It is obvious if we heed the words of the prophets who lived among us that the United States has not handled the dignity of humans especially people of color very well at all. He said the way to God is only one: “Prophet Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad…showed the one path which is the divine path. Respect for human beings which is respect for divine power. Anybody who chooses to love the Almighty is to love humanity. The greatest triumph of evil is to break the dignity of humanity.” As I type these words from my notes, and I remember seeing him say these words, and I am constantly reminded as to how this country has broken the dignity of Libyan people by bombing them this year. I am constantly reminded of how much a strong contradiction that news sources are engaged in by not raising the human rights abuses that this country’s bombings constituted, and how these bombings served not really U.S. empire but European empire, in the service of European imperialism. According to a cable from U.S. Ambassador Gene Kretz to the State Department on June 4, 2009, made public by Wikileaks, Libya caught the attention of U.S. forces when it forced European oil firms, mainly France’s Total, to agree to take a much smaller percentage of oil and gas yielded from their wells, under threat of nationalization.

See: http://openoil.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Wikileaks-summaries.pdf

According to my July 1, 2011 interview with Cynthia McKinney who reported first hand on the situation in Libya as of June, Libyan citizens have free healthcare, free education, and free higher education. She describes “resource nationalism” as the use of the Libyan resources to benefit the Libyan people as of 8:45 in the following interview:

See: http://rhoneedifies.blogspot.com/2011/07/interview-with-cynthia-mckinney-about.html

Why was Gadafi’s threat of nationalization so dangerous? Because apparently he was doing what the West does not do, nor want others to do, which is providing basic services for its citizens. Based on this reporting by McKinney, Gadafi was more interested, than any other U.S. president in what Ahmadinejad called the “dignity of humanity.” At this September 20th talk, Ahmadinejad said that “if they [Christian or Muslim] recognize their humanity, they will not oppress.” Based on the imperialist oppression in Libya and in Afghanistan and every other place of U.S. military occupation, the U.S. by this definition has not recognized their humanity. This reminds me of James Baldwin’s explanations for the need of the term “nigger” in America. He said it reflected white American culture’s hatred of itself, its own refusal to recognize its own humanity. Ahmadinejad said that “today our combined mission is to save our humanity from evildoers.” He then asked: “do we know of an animal who has killed one million animals of its own kind?” And this raised a small laugh in the audience. It raised in my mind the inhumane foreign policy of the United States who seems bent on trying to use colonial domination to solve its own ills. However I believe that because of this nation’s apparent belief in the need to “niggerize” peoples of color across the world, previously Vietnam and now Libya, this American empire will fall as our prophets have told us. Ahmadinejad said “we’re not in a conflict against humans. There is a war against evil which comes in the form of other humans. We’re noticing a war against humans, against human civilizations.” As a Christian, I was able to appreciate this statement, particularly this last point because I believe the truth behind Paul’s letter to the Ephesians which is something Fannie Lou Hamer said in protesting the Vietnam War in 1970, particularly chapter 6 verse 12 which says: “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”

I certainly believe that those forces who pushed for the bombing and military displacement of Gadafi are those ruled by the darkness of this world, those ruled by Satan. It is my duty as a Christian to shed light on this truth and to work against evil. Darkness and light cannot exist. I thought much of what Ahmadinejad was saying here was the truth of light. Because Ms. Hamer as a Christian, was fighting against this country’s use of military power to bomb or shoot the Vietnamese into submission (which failed), I have to, as a Christian, fight against this country’s use of military power to bomb or shoot Libya into submission. To turn them into a country like the United States where the banking elite “niggerizes” all its citizens by taking away their jobs, then daring them to pay with income they don’t have, for their housing, education healthcare and education. So the moment African leaders like Gadafi want to use his nation’s resources to actually help his people with “resource nationalism,” he is immediately turned into a “nigger” or a despised group and demonized and replaced by a long bombing campaign and by arming so called revolutionaries who, in Malcolm’s terms, are actually mercenaries, defenders of Totale oil company and European imperialism. Those who armed and who depend on the gun for imposition of European colonial domination are those who, in my Christian theology, are ruled by Satan. They would rather not see an African leader develop too much power that will threaten their new world “order.” What this “order” basically consists of is keeping the majority in any nation poor and subservient from top to bottom, to Western interests.

Ahmadinejad later said that the same forces who claim to bring “freedom” do it at the “cost of bombs and destruction.” Ahmadinejad ended the talk coming back to his premium on dignity of humanity. He said that with this version of “freedom” touted by the U.S., “the truth and dignity of humanity is in danger.” However for those who are ready and willing to resist and stop the propaganda machine that is prepared to steamroll Iran, we have to know within ourselves that “eternal life has not been destroyed.” I happen to believe that eternal life is capable within reach by striving for Jesus Christ, who resisted the policies of the moneychangers who today represent the old white European families who own the banks that run the Federal Reserve. Dealing with the money changers was the only time in the Bible when Jesus used physical violence to make a point. Charles V. Hamilton defined a revolutionary as one who uses calculated acts of instrumental violence to bring about social change. Malcolm X had a close relationship to Ben Bella who helped push the French out of Algeria. They did so by instrumental violence. Ahmadinejad finished by saying that saving humanity is a big task, but “we must believe that humanity will prevail.” He said specifically to those at this dinner, which I agreed with, that:
“All of us have gathered here tonight to join the tone of humanity and to fight the forces of the Devil. They seem insurmountable but they are extremely weak and vulnerable. We must join forces and believe in the power of the Almighty…Why do they wish to occupy countries for their oil wealth? My belief is that victory is near. When truth seekers are all over the world, a day will come when the world all over will be filled with truth and justice.”

Yes, to me the U.S. imperialist machine, which kills as many of our citizens as it does foreign citizens, seems insurmountable. However, like Ahmadinejad, I believe in the power of the Almighty ultimately. He said in his speech that there is one way. I believe that one way is Jesus Christ and I know that Ahmadinejad as president of an Islamic Republic who is Muslim, does not believe that Christ is the one way, however in principle, we agree that we have to take all steps necessary to fight oppressive U.S. imperialism that has already proven it is willing to do anything to stop nationalization and use military power to occupy countries for their oil wealth. I’ve learned that as a writer and journalist I have to do anything to oppose this imperialism in order to work with the majority of the world who is against this imperialism.


ON DEMOCRACY NOW, LIBYA, AND THE DANGERS OF LIBERALISM


Since Cynthia McKinney returned from her fact finding mission in June of 2011, I have been frankly appalled by her being ignored by Amy Goodman’s program Democracy Now. In fact, ever since Goodman’s coverage of Iran in 2009, I have had serious questions about Goodman calling her news source as “independent.” In my opinion, Goodman raised a bit too much questions about the legitimacy of the 2009 presidential election in Iran, especially claiming that protesters numbered in the hundreds of thousands. Who’s to say that those protesters were not there in support of Ahmadinejad? Matthew Weaver seemed to be asking the most important questions:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/09/iran-twitter-revolution-protests

In the Introduction to his book The Black Aesthetic, Addison Gayle Jr. reminded me of what I heard of Ahmadinejad. He writes that “to be American is to be opposed to humankind, against the dignity of the individual, and against the striving in man for compassion and tenderness; to be an American is to lose one’s humanity.” Certainly Ahmadinejad’s talk reminded me of this painful truth in terms of all of us on this landmass condoning the wanton slaughter of hundreds of thousands of civilians on the other side of the Atlantic. However what he said about the purpose of the Black Aesthetic speaks strongly to me as an artist and as a writer: “the Black Aesthetic…is a corrective—a means of helping Black people out of the polluted mainstream of Americanism…” I am a faithful follower of Democracy Now! But I am afraid that Goodman’s pro-imperialist coverage of Libya this year has proven their willful entrance into the “polluted mainstream of Americanism” which includes cooperating with American imperialism. In her 2004 book The Exception to the Rulers, Amy Goodman wrote that Judith Miller’s false reports “played an invaluable role in the administration’s propaganda war,” however by only talking to Juan Cole about the U.S.-armed NATO led replacement of Gadafi, Goodman is playing an invaluable role in the Obama administration’s propaganda war meant to justify the military ouster of Gadafi. John Walsh wrote that Juan Cole is a consultant to the CIA who, along with U.S. Ambassador Gene Kretz, is interested in stopping Gadafi from nationalizing his oil and continuing to provide free healthcare and free education for his citizens.

See: http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/08/30/meet-professor-juan-cole-consultant-to-the-cia/

Walsh said that Cole “is anxious to promote himself as a man of the left as he spins out his rationale for the war on Libya.” He parrots the same lies we’ve heard from the mainstream media about the evils of Gadafi, while our evils of bombing tens of thousands of Libyans are ignored. This is why I say that I cannot in good faith be a liberal especially when among its ranks are those who consult the CIA on how to infiltrate foreign cultures for private profit. These so called liberals are those who will deny a nation and its leader its sovereign right to provide free healthcare and education to its citizens, while leaders here in this country glory in the poverty of its citizens we force to make unfair choices between healthcare and education. As long as I promise to die and stay Black, I can no longer be a liberal in good faith. I cannot critique the empire yet uncritically reap benefits from the empire without demanding a fundamental restructuring.

Goodman writes that we form “opinions based on the full range of views that you hear. But you’ve got to hear from all sides, and that was what was so deeply compromised by what happened with the embedding of reporters during the invasion of Iraq” (174-5). But in reporting on Libya, Amy is only providing the pro-imperialist side on Libya and by doing so she can no longer claim to be an “independent” source of media. She has now become unfortunately part of the polluted American mainstream. I can no longer trust Democracy Now to provide what Goodman claims to provide in an “independent” media. This is why I have begun a petition demanding from Amy Goodman an explanation as to why she will not host former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney to talk about Libya on her program. You can sign here:

http://signon.org/sign/demand-from-democracynow?source=c.url&r_by=116151

Goodman reported yesterday that the U.S. continues to back Abdul Raziq, a warlord who did the bidding of the U.S. in Afghanistan. This bidding included targeted assassinations and torture of civilians. Given this report, is Goodman not at all concerned about the role Democracy Now is playing in doing the bidding of the U.S. in Libya? The problem with liberalism is that it justifies oppression by substituting one form of it for another instead of getting rid of it altogether. Democracy Now seems to goad its listeners into believing that occupying Afghanistan is wrong however occupying Libya is right. To that I say a loud and resounding NO. Wrong is wrong.

The U.S. imperial state should not have been backing Raziq any more than they should have been arming rebels in Libya, just because European leaders wanted to stop Gadafi’s resource nationalism. However this kind of reporting, emerging apparently from the liberal mind of Goodman, is trying to oppose imperialism in Afghanistan yet condone imperialism in Libya. And that kind of liberalism is unacceptable for those who care for humanity. To Goodman’s credit, she interviewed Horace Campbell who said rightfully that the Egyptian revolution may prompt a U.S. occupation in a neighboring country (or countries) in order ultimately to quell the Egyptian revolution. The NATO bombing is proof of Campbell’s correct prediction.

See: http://www.democracynow.org/2011/3/2/prof_horace_campbell_peace_justice_movement

Despite featuring Campbell, Goodman’s reporting on Libya is too complicit with the imperialist ambitions of this country, and that is egregious. Especially as this country faces increasing poverty and is telling its citizens that there is no more money for the social services such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, that help us meet our basic needs today. Well imperialism even wants those services ended. According to Carolyn Cutrone and Steve Rendall however, the main cause of the federal budget deficit are the capital gains tax cuts and not the social services.

See: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4384

Imperialism is desperately trying to expand itself by making Americans more poor, so Goodman’s support of imperialism in Libya must be checked. I am writing this not at all to embarrass Amy Goodman but to reach a greater understanding of how the American state can and will influence “independent” media to become no longer “independent” but polluted and eventually meaningless.
I sincerely hope Amy Goodman can respond to my query about her coverage of Libya and not sink any further in to the polluted mainstream of Americanism. –RF.

Friday, August 19, 2011

A Talk With Cynthia McKinney about Libya and Gordon Barnes about Malcolm X




Yesterday I had a powerful conversation with former U.S. Representative Cynthia McKinney about Obama in 2012 and her reporting of Libya that has been ignored by the mainstream media. I am circulating a petition to demand from Amy Goodman, a leader in the progressive American news, AN EXPLANATION for why she has ignored Cynthia McKinney for over two months now. Since June 1st, Cynthia McKinney visited Libya and reported on their events, as she expressed in my interview on my July 1st post.

PLEASE JOIN ME IN SIGNING A PETITION TO DEMAND AN EXPLANATION FROM DEMOCRACY NOW ABOUT WHY THEY WILL NOT COVER CYNTHIA MCKINNEY'S REPORTING IN LIBYA.

Following my interview with Cynthia Mckinney was another powerful interview with Gordon Barnes about chapters 10 to 13 in the biography of Malcolm X, by the late Manning Marable. At this time in the biography, Malcolm is leaving the Nation of Islam, begins his historic hajj where he learns not to hate white people only because of their skin color. Our discussion ended in December 1964 when Malcolm X speaks in New York with Fannie Lou Hamer.