The Rev. Doctor Jeremiah Wright Preaches at Salem
It was altogether fitting that Jeremiah Wright should be invited into the pulpit at Salem, a congregant of the first black American Church: The African Methodist Episcopal Church founded in 1792 in Philadelphia, just five years after the ratification of the United States Constitution in that same city. And from his first utterances the pastor put the meeting squarely within the fighting tradition of this church that once conspired with enslaved Africans to overthrow the slave regime with blood and fire, and who’s Bishops helped to organize the African National Congress in South Africa that would eventually bring on the collapse of the apartheid regime and put Nelson Mandela in power!
When Rev. Wright took the stage he was greeted with a standing ovation accompanied by African drums and shouts of salutation. Dr. James McIntosh introduced him with all the grandeur of a court griot reciting praise songs heralding the arrival of a great warrior of the people. And to this crowd, the present writer included, he most surely is. From the outset the Reverend Dr. Wright made it clear that this was not a worship service, rather he had been asked by long time media watch dog and cultural warrior sister Betty Dobson – who looked like an African Queen Mother in her flowing traditional gown – to speak to the question of the portrayal of the black community in American mass media.
As a man with more degrees than a thermometer – which include two master’s and a PhD in theology – the Rev Dr. Wright held forth in a scholary lecture worthy of a professor of media studies. Beginning his talk with an analysis of how images are manipulated in theater and film, the central thesis of his polemic was that the black experience with major white media “has been traumatic.” And, as he correctly notes, this is largely because black people are not allowed to tell our story from our perspective. Instead the black experience is too often interpreted by others who may or may not understand our spiritual strivings, or have our best interest at heart.
As an example of how the black voice has been silenced in mass media, he quoted a Nigerian professor who pointed out that in the epic movie “Armistead,” which was based on the true story of the 19th century trial of a heroic mutiny by captured Africans on a Cuban ship, the Africans had no intelligible spoken parts. He then contrasted this with Speilberg’s treatment of the Spanish characters whose dialogue was accompanied by English sub-titles. “Did Spielberg deny voice to the Jewish victims in the holocaust?” he asked. I must confess that I had never considered this point; a fact which Dr. Wright cited as an example of how the black community has become conditioned to accept dehumanizing images of ourselves. But then, I never saw the movie.
The Reverend Doctor Wright went on to demonstrate the truth of essayist and cultural theoretician Albert Murray’s axiom that white media will always choose pathology over heroism when selecting a story about African-Americans. This point is also being stressed by Afro-American film critic Armond White in his critique of the new film “Precious.” As is his fashion, White cites a number of films with African American themes that are far more deserving of the press Precious – a tawdry tale of pathology – is getting; the instant classic “Cadillac Records” among them. To further illustrate his point Dr. Wright cited the fact that when he and a group of black theologians held a conference on “The Prophetic Witness of the Black Church,” and presented learned papers on the subject to try and bring some clarity to the confusion about black church traditions and his mission spread by hysterical verbal arsonist at the White Apartheid Broadcast company aka WABC am, the white media ignored it and continued to spout ignorant and incendiary disinformation.
Dr. Wright cited an Iraqi scholar who has written a book on American/Iraqi relations; She told him “you Americans construct the narrative of Iraq in the media, The Iraqi’s are voiceless.” Yet once the narrative has been established – no matter if its fiction – the entire conversation becomes about the narrative, not the reality. The Iraqi scholar pointed out that she was also a victim of a misleading media narrative. And she cautioned him to remain true to his identity.“The media tramatizes, stigmatizes, and systemizes the dehumanization of African people. And then the media paralyzes African people” observed Dr. Wright.
He also talked about how the white media controls the interpretation of our history, and he began to resurrect historical images black people constructed in a counter narrative to white supremacist fantasies. Naturally he commented at some length on Dr. Dubois’ masterpiece of American letters “The Souls of Black Folk.” Especially his deeply moving and enlightening essay “Of the Sorrow Songs,” the first treatise on the sacred music of the African American slave community written by a trained scholar. Then in a sing song cadence he pointed out that William James, distinguished Prof. of religion at Harvard and brother of the great novelist Henry James, had declared “God Dam America for her treatment of the Philippines!”
Upon his quotation of James’ Jeremiad the audience rose from their seats in a boisterous ovation. Dr. Wright then discussed the early black theater movement at the turn of the 20th century. Analyzing the cultural nationalist character of the early New York musical revues by the gifted actor/comedians Williams and Walker – “In Abyssinia,” “In Bandana Land,” etc – he asked how many people in the audience had ever heard of Bert Williams. Few hands were raised in the crowded sanctuary, so the learned Doctor explained that these shows represented an attempt by conscious black artists to rescue the African American image from the constant racist attacks and vulgar parodies of the blackface minstrel shows that were all the rage among Euro-Americans.
Rev. Wright also pointed out that we are still fighting for control of our image in mass media, and argues that we “have internalized our degradation. Internalized self-hatred, worship of all things white and reject all things African.” He also observed that publishing and print media is dying, being wiped out by the internet. Of course, this prediction is not new. Ten years ago I wrote an essay titled “Why I Retreated Into Cyberspace,” in which I argued that the pulp media was headed toward extinction; but now I know that may be an overstatement of the immediate problem. However, in so far as the future of serious Afro-American literature of the sort that nurtured the intellect and inspired hope in previous generations, the torrent of “ghetto novels” written by people who are untutored in literary history and technique, and promoting decadent rather than uplifting images, is threatening to drive it from the marketplace. There may come a time when serious black literature may be published only by university presses, which are subsidized and do not depend upon the market.
At one point Rev. Wright compared the miseducation of Afro-Americans to the training of sheepdogs; pointing out that a sheepdog will attack other dogs to protect the sheep! And he cited Clarence Thomas as an example. He relied on black psychologist like Niam Akbar, who pointed out that our ancestors were in bondage but they were not slaves because they never consented to it, and he cited an unbroken pantheon of black freedom fighters in all fields, while periodically injecting lines from the Afro-American spiritual Freedom over me: “Before I’ll be a slave I’ll be buried in my grave.” Curiously, since we were in a church, the rest of that verse which he did not recite would be most appropriate: “and go home to my God and be free!” In this part of the speech Rev. Wright fully utilized the oratorical devices of the black preacher. His speech became a dynamic crescendo, in which he reiterated his major theme at regular intervals around a rhythmic cadence that was both inspirational and irresistible, bringing this highly political crowd of atheist and near atheist to their feet in a rousing standing ovation!
People turned out in the rain!
To Hear the Much Maligned Preacher For Them self
Since it takes money to run an organization and CEMOTAP does not seek foundation or government funding – because he who pays the piper calls the tune – they pass the collection plate at their meetings to cover expenses. In this sense they are operating in the tradition established by some of our most successful leaders – such as A. Phillip and Dr. Carter G. Woodson – who insisted that black people must finance their own struggle. Hence instead of seeking the support of foundations or the comfort and security of a university professorship Dr. Woodson, whose academic credentials could easily match any professor at Harvard where he earned his PhD, founded The Association for the Study of Negro Life and History and financed his research by selling memberships.
African Americans of all classes invested in the work of the organization by purchasing these memberships and allowed Dr. Woodson to publish a first rate scholarly journal; a bulletin for widespread popular consumption; establish a company to publish his and other pioneering scholarly works of enduring value, and train a cadre of professional historians who rewrote American history from the black perspective employing the highest standards of scientific historical research. Asa Phillip Randolph, who led the fight to organize the lowest workers on the payroll of the Pullman company, which was then one the largest and richest corporations in the world, refused to accept money from white labor unions. Even when he was about to be evicted from his office he refused offers of assistance from John L. Lewis, the leader of the powerful United Mine Workers. Randolph insisted that black folk must finance their own liberation! CEMOTAP has learned that lesson well; which is why they routinely delve into controversial issues that other African American organizations dare not touch.
Longtime Activist Ted Wilson Was There
The Moving Spirit and Organizer of the Literary Tribute to Amiri Baraka
“Let Loose On the World”
Anti-Vaccination Activist Curtis Cost Was there Too
Hawking his latest book warning about the dangers of vaccination
Led by anti-police brutality activist and former cop Delacy Davis, who initiated the giving and set the standard by putting two hundred dollars in the collection plate, many others gave quite generous sums. In the spirit of the church, whose methods of raising money are tried and true, Dr. McIntosh made the most innovative pitch for money I have yet heard. “Do any of you have a backache?” He asked the crowd, many of whom had been sitting for hours waiting to hear Jeremiah the Prophet. “I am a physician,” he announced, “trained in the science of medicine, so I am qualified to diagnose the cause of your pain: Evil spirits! It’s those wretched dollars you’ve got in your pocket! Just dump them into the plate and it will ease your pain.” Then the good doctor called upon the audience to banish the evil Andrew Jackson and the undercover African Alexander Hamilton and confine them to the collection plate.
The pitch, to say the least, was productive as the people rushed to rid themselves of evil spirits masquerading as US currency. It was, by any measure, a triumphant evening. At the end of the day, it was another enlightening CEMOTAP production. And this time the prophet was honored in his own land.
*****************
Playthell Benjamin
Harlem New York
November 23, 2009

































David Brooks Missed The Point Again
Posted in Playthell on politics with tags Black Commentator, Conservative Columnist, David Brooks, Fort Hood, Major Hasan, New York Times, playthell's commentary, Times columnist on November 20, 2009 by playthell“Tis better to be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt”
Mark Twain
On Rushing To Therapy
Reading David Brooks is a strange experience. Although the writing is usually well crafted and his arguments crammed full of interesting information – erudite even – somehow he often manages to miss the point. On such occasions he is far more glib than learned; his arguments have only the illusion of depth. The latest example of this curious phenomenon is his November 10, column in the New York Times “The Rush to Therapy.” After thoroughly misreading the historical record regarding race and populism in a transparent apologia attempting to explain away the vulgar racism of the so-called “Tea Party Patriots” in his column, “No, It’s not about Race” – for which I was compelled to straighten his cap in my critique “David Brooks Is Clueless,” available on this site – he has now chimed in on the slaughter at Fort Hood. And once again his missive promotes confusion rather than provide clarity.
For Mr. Brooks’ taste the nation has fretted far too much over the psychological problems of Major Nidal Hassan, who went “postal” and shot up a bunch of his fellow warriors at Fort Hood; men who were presumed to be his comrades-in-arms, men whose psychological problems he was commanded to heal. “Major Hassan was portrayed as a disturbed individual who was under a lot of stress” he writes. “We learned about pre-traumatic stress syndrome, and secondary stress disorder which one gets from hearing about other people’s stress.” It is fair to say that Mr. Brooks gives short shrift to such arguments and snidely notes: “A shroud of political correctness settled over the conversation. Hasan was portrayed as a victim of society, a poor soul who was pushed over the edge by prejudice and unhappiness. There was a national rush to therapy.”
In his infinite wisdom Mr. Brooks ridicules our naiveté and calls a spade a spade: “This was understandable. It is important to tamp down vengeful hatreds in moments of passion but it was also patronizing. Public commentators assumed the air of kindergarten teachers who had to protect their children from thinking impermissible and intolerant thoughts.” While I have heard enough from the ubiquitous Times columnist to know that we probably have radically different ideas about what constitute “impermissible and intolerant thoughts,” in my view “protecting’ Americans from having such thoughts is as much the business of Mr. Brooks, who assumes the air of a college teacher, as those he denounces in his column.
For instance, I have read nothing penned by Mr. Brooks that explains to the American people the role US foreign policy played in making us the target of the Islamic Jihad. Why not Sweden if it’s all because they hate our personal freedom, secular society, and licentious sexuality? While I cannot claim to be an expert on Mr. Brook’s oeuvre, I suspect one would never learn the answers to these questions reading it. Alas I can say with certainty that you will learn nothing useful in answering these fundamental questions in the column under discussion.
And if the commentators Mr. Brooks criticizes are guilty of being “patronizing” because they wish to factor in the mental stress Dr. Nidal was suffering, his attitude toward the ravages of mental depression can be justly labeled contemptuous as well as abysmally ignorant of the nature of acute depression. Had Mr. Brooks bothered to tune in on one of the premiere tribunes of our times, Bill Moyers – a man of towering intellect, balanced judgment and sterling character – he might have written a more intelligent column; a quality Mr. Brooks apparently confuses with intellectual exhibitionism.
In a moving and enlightening program examining a new documentary on the mental maladies resulting from the experience of combat – i.e. organized mass murder – we were provided an inside look at the profound stress military psychiatrists are subjected to. Much of their work is trying to help soldiers suffering from Post-traumatic Stress Syndrome – which means they must listen attentively as these warriors attempt to exorcise their demons by reliving the horrors of combat through talk therapy, and then give them pills to keep them calm in an attempt control the suicidal impulses that accompany acute depression, even inducing a chemical euphoria disguised as happiness.
The tales told by men who had fought in war and its effects on the psychiatrist who are tasked with helping maintain their mental health, leave no doubt that Dr. Nidal may well have been motivated by some species of mental breakdown. It is certainly a good place to start in any interrogation of the factors that might have compelled him to launch a murderous assault on the soldiers he was entrusted to guide and protect, both as an army officer and a Psychiatrist. Yet Mr. Brooks argues that this approach “absolved Hasan – before the real evidence was in – of his Responsibility.”
In Mr. Brook’s view it wasn’t about the mysterious workings of a mind that snapped under great stress – due to the extreme horror of the stories he was hearing; the fact that the horrors related by the soldiers were being perpetrated against his Muslim brethren, and the pressures he was under now that he had been ordered to deploy to the battlefields and assist in those atrocities – rather it was all a question of “the master narrative” Dr. Hasan chose to make sense of events in his world. He tells us that “evidence is now mounting to suggest he chose the extremist War On Islam narrative that so often leads to murderous results.” Mr. Brookes goes on to argue: “The conversation in the first days after the massacre was well intentioned, but it suggested a willful flight from reality.”
While I agree that there was a “flight from reality,” I am also certain that we have different conceptions of what reality means. However I think Brooks got it right when he observed that the initial conversation among the nation’s opinion makers “ignored the fact that the war narrative of the struggle against Islam is the central feature of American foreign policy. It ignored the fact that this narrative can be embraced by a self-radicalizing individual in the US as much as by groups Tehran, Gaza or Kandahar.” However for our thoughtful conservative pundit – whom many consider the smart set’s conservative thinker – failure to recognize these facts denies “the possibility of evil.”
That Mr. Brooks cannot conjure a scenario where a narrative presenting the unvarnished truth about the role of US policy in the Islamic World might drive a devout Muslim military psychiatrist to righteous anger, which metamorphoses into murderous madness, exposes his provincial ethnocentric view of the world. The fact is that Dr. Hasan had delivered a lecture warning of the dangers of sending American Muslims to fight in the Middle East; he told his colleagues it was a dangerous practice and Muslims should be stationed elsewhere in the world.” Instead of taking the warning seriously his medical colleagues thought him a sad deluded guy who was becoming overly influenced by Islamic propaganda, and they didn’t even think it was serious enough to file a report on the matter.
But what is far worse are the revelations thar are surfacing as I write about the fact that Major Nidal – who is a member of the long suffering Palestinian people, a people whose grievances against the US go back 60 wears – had recommended that several soldiers he counseled should be Court Marshaled for committing “war crimes!” Predictably, the response of the amoral wags on the right is that Major Hasan had violated Dr. patient confidentially rules by reporting their crimes, rather than outrage over the fact that they were war criminals. But then the Republicans are quite comfortable with the known war criminals in the highest echelon of the GOP.
They enthusiastically celebrate the biggest war criminal of them all, Dirty Dick Cheney: The Butcher of Baghdad! A man who was the principal architect of the Iraq invasion the unapologetic author of America’s torture policies. Both crimes of war! And I have yet to hear our Mr. Brooks say a mumbling word on this naked truth. Instead we have been subjected to a web of transparent lies and pompous right-wing gibberish from Republicans that exposes an appalling poverty of ethics. If I have unfairly maligned him; if I have misspoke on this subject; If I have overlooked some eloquent argument, or enraged diatribe, issuing from the pen of our smart conservative at the Times opposing his party’s love affair with Dirty Dick, and their obscene indifference to his crimes, then Mr. Brooks should call me out like I’m calling him out. I anxiously await his response.
***************
Playthell Benjamin
Harlem New York
November 18, 2009
Leave A Comment »