Viva Afro-Americanos!

 

Jay and Beyoncé Surrounded by Cuban Fans

On  Race, Class and US Policy on Afro- Cubans

I was delighted to hear that the second most popular power couple in the world, international superstars Jay Z and Beyoncé, who rank just below Barack and Michel in world-wide popularity, decided to spend their fifth wedding anniversary in Cuba.  There are many reasons why I rejoiced at the news.  First of all I have always regarded the economic boycott as unjust.  It began because the US Congress, acting as shills for the United Fruit Company, a giant American agri-business corporation who viewed the Island nation of Cuba as it’s private plantation…much as the firestone company viewed the West African nation of Liberia as a little more than their rubber plantation.

Hence when a young white Cuban lawyer named Fidel Castro, frustrated by the anti-democratic rule of military thugs on the Island which was a de facto American colony – led a revolution that deposed the corrupt military strong man Fulgentsia Batista, an American puppet, and began to institute sweeping changes, the US became a fierce opponent of the Cuban Revolution and has remained so over half a century later.

Since the Cubans never committed any offense against the American people, US hostility toward Cuba was sparked by internal economic reforms in that revolutionary Cubans made in their country, which ended the dominant role of the United Fruit Company and other American business interests, along with US support for the decadent white racist Cuban elite, who were their partners in the fleecing of the toiling Cuban masses.

It is the remnants of that white Cuban privileged class residing in southern Florida, centered in Miami, that keeps that hostility alive today and tries their best to prevent American citizens from traveling to Cuba – even as they have constantly complained about the Cuban government not allowing their citizens to travel to the US.  Hence it should surprise no one that the loudest voices criticizing Beyoncé and Jay’s visit to the Island are Cuban Americans from Florida.

The chatter began with protests from two Congresswomen – give their names – and has now been joined by that little snarky charlatan Marco Rubio; who is playing to the rightwing white Cubans in Southern Florida that comprise his base.  “According to recent news reports,” says Rubio, “Jay-Z and Beyoncé’s Cuba trip, which the regime seized on for propaganda purposes, was fully licensed by the Treasury Department.  If true, the Obama Administration should explain exactly how trips like these comply with U.S. law and regulations governing travel to Cuba and it should disclose how many more of these trips they have licensed.”

I think President Obama should pay this little Pisher no rabbit ass mind!  He should not be taken seriously on anything regarding Cuba.  This is the same guy who won a Senate seat by lying about his family history. During the election he presented himself as the son of Cuban refugees who fled Castro’s oppressive communist regime, and he won the hearts of all the suckers who will support anybody that has an axe to grind with Fidel.

However an enterprising reporter at the Miami Herald fact checked his story and discovered it was a fabrication.  The truth is that Rubio’s family fled Cuba under right-winger dictator Batista, in 1958, before Castro came to power.  I believe this is why Rubio was not interested in running with Romney in the VP slot; he is afraid his lies will resurface and there is abundant video of him telling this big lie. Only a party composed of shameless liars, who run campaigns based on lies – ala Mitt Romney – would even consider a shameless liar like Rubio as a candidate.  I hope they do select him as their presidential candidate…because this joker will never win the US presidency!

The white Cubans of southern Florida have intimidated politicians into supporting a policy that is not in the best interests of the US; hence I think American citizens should violate the travel ban en mass and force the government to prosecute them!  This would again raise the question as to whether the US government has the right to arbitrarily restrict our right to travel where we please.

It is a challenge that several Americans who support the Cuban Revolution have raised in the past – Afro-Americans such as Reverend Luscious Walker and Dr. Johnetta Cole prominently among them.  Reverend Walker led multi-racial groups of Americans bearing critical supplies denied to Cubans due to the protracted American economic embargo for 21 years straight.

Reverend Lucius Walker and El Presidente

Embracing the Cuban Revolution

He would get around American travel restrictions to Cuba by embarking from Mexico or Canada, two nations in the hemisphere that saw no danger to themselves from a revolution on the little Island of Cuba.  Reverend Walker saw no danger to the US either; rather he saw US policy as a menace to Cuba and all of Latin America – a view that was reinforced when he was shot by American sponsored “contras” while on a mercy mission to the people of Nicaragua.    That’s why he continued to travel to Cuba while refusing opportunities to travel there legally under a special dispensation of the US government.

Walker’s intention was to directly challenge the morality of the US government’s policy by taking bibles on his missions claiming he was bring “God’s word to Cuba,” and the Justice Department wisely decided not to take the bait.  On his last trip to Cuba Rev. Walker took a variety of medical supplies such as EKG machines, medicines that were hard to get in Cuba but was in abundant supply in the US, Incubators, etc.  Rev. had a special name for these gifts from Americans of conscience: “Friendshipments.”

When this black American preacher from humble origins danced and joined the great ancestors of our struggle at 80 years old, having remained in the fight for a better world through international solidarity with oppressed and working peoples to the end of his days, the reverence with which he was regarded by the Cuban people was expressed in an editorial of Granma, the official organ of the Central Committee of the ruling Communist Party.  “Cubans, in gratitude, “the statement said, “have to say that we don’t want to think of a world without Lucius Walker”.

Dr. Johnetta Cole demonstrated her solidarity with the Cuban Revolution by writing and lecturing about the realities of revolutionary Cuba and leading Vinceramos Brigades down to the Island to help harvest the sugarcane crop and exchange ideas with revolutionary anti-colonial delegations from around the world, in defiance of US government policy.  Dr. Cole used to argue passionately in defense of the revolutionary policies of the Cuban government when we were colleagues in the W.E.B. DuBois Department of Black Studies at U-Mass.

While these Afro-Americans travelled to Cuba to express solidarity with the Revolution, Jay Z and Beyoncé appear to have just wanted to take a vacation on this beautiful exotic island where Salsa was born.  I have never heard either of them express a political concern beyond working to reelect President Obama by bundling money.  And I have no idea what they think about the plight of Afro-Cubans, since they have been mum thus far.

 Dr. Johnetta Cole

Anthropologist and Defender of Cuban Revolution

 I do know that there is a thriving Hip Hop scene that is heavily black and political.   In fact, I have had Afro-Cubans tell me that it is the true voice of black Cuba, since they have no other vehicle by which to publicly address racial issues. Hence there is no telling what they talked about with Cuban rappers, although inquiring minds certainly want to know.  Despite their silence however, Beyoncé and Jay Z’s controversial Cuban sojourn affords us an opportunity to discuss weighty questions such as the role of race and class race in shaping contemporary politics and economic relations in  Cuban society; and how these issues affect  American policy towards Cuba.

Beyonce at the Tropicana!

Goddesses of Neo African Dance

 A Taste of Afro-American Style

Dssto the height of fashion!

Chillin with the Youths

And they are lovin it! 

 And so did the Children

 

The time of their lives! 

 

***************

The suppression of serious discourses about race by the Cuban government, which is dominated by Hispanic Cubans – i.e. White Cubans”– is a persistent theme in the critique of revolutionary Cuba by Afro-Cubans.  While most Afro-American Marxist, and friends of the revolution of all ideological stripes, praise the dramatic advances of Afro-Cubans since the revolution, parroting the position of the Cuban government that the race problem is passé, I am reminded of Faulkner’s statement that the American South will never escape it’s past, and noted that “the past isn’t even past.”

This can also be said regarding the question of anti-black racism in Cuba; alas while official policy denounces racism, racist feeling and ideology is deeply embedded in Cuban culture and can only be rooted out by persistently confronting in a thousand forums.  Instead it has been the policy of the Cuban government to suppress discussions of the race issue.  Hence, based on myriad reports from Afro-Cubans, racism persists in that Spanish speaking Caribbean nation despite government denial.

Suspicions about the shortcomings of the revolutionary Cuban government’s policies on race relations began early on by some of the first Afro-Americans to visit the Island after the Revolution.  One of these was political theorist and cultural critic Harold Cruse, author of the seminal text “The Crisis of the Negro Intellectual,” which offers one of the most astute critiques of the inability of white Marxist to accommodate nationalist aspirations on the part of blacks, which is a healthy response to white supremacy – whether on the right or left.

 Harold Cruse

Skeptical of White Cuban Communist

Hence Cruse reported that while Leroi Jones – aka Amiri Baraka, whom he described as a beatnik poet from Greenwich Village flirting with revolution – was enraptured by everything they saw and heard on the official government tours, Cruse was skeptical because “there were too many white communist walking around looking important.”

After having spent years in the American Communist Party, Harold Cruse, who would go on to become a Professor of history at the University of Michigan, was suspicious of the motives of white communists because he felt that they pursued their group interests while suppressing such tendencies on the part of blacks, mislabeling it “bourgeois black nationalism”

 George Padmore

Father of the African Independence Movement

It was in essence the same reason why George Padmore, a Trinidadian activist intellectual who is rightfully called “The Father of the African independence movement,” quit the International Communist movement and wrote his famous book length polemic “Pan-Africanism or Communism.”  As the director of The Bureau of Negro Affairs for the Comintern, Padmore was the highest ranking black man in the history of the international Communist Movement. (See: Dr. J.L. Hooker’s Black Revolutionary)

By the time this delegation of intellectuals, journalist and artist visited Cuba,  we already had the experience of Robert Williams, President of the Monroe North Carolina NAACP and ex-Marine, who had organized his community to resist the Ku Klux Klan with arms and was forced into exile in Cuba. It was no accident of history that the revolutionary Cuban government was willing to grant political asylum to Robert Williams.   He had recently come to their attention by virtue of a telegram Williams sent to Adele Stevenson, the pompous patrician American Ambassador to the United Nations, after the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion of October 17^th 1961.

From the moment the revolutionaries came to power in Cuba the US government began plotting against them.  This interference would prove counter-productive because it helped to drive a nationalist reformer interested in honest government and a more just economic system that would raise the standard of living for the Cuban working class into an alliance with the Soviet Union.  Had the US supported the Revolution the course of history would have been different and infinitely better.

Alas powerful US economic elites viewed the revolution as a disaster for their interests and prompted the Kennedy Administration to take action to depose Castro and quash the revolution by launching a counter-revolution. After all, the Central Intelligence Agency had successfully overthrown the democratically elected government of Iran in a covert action and installed the dictatorial Shah, just eight years earlier.  High on hubris the CIA was tasked with organizing, arming and training a counter-revolutionary military force composed of white Cuban’s who had fled the Island.

Convinced that the majority of Cubans opposed the revolution, which was the result of relying on a narrative constructed by the losers -the CIA had calculated that once the invaders landed on Cuban soil the Cuban masses would join them and overthrow the Castro government.  What they failed to understand is that it is impossible to overthrow a military strongman like Batista by revolutionary action without broad popular support.

The Cubans had voted by their actions, since the reason that Fidel turned to revolution in the first place was because the democratic process had been subverted and rendered impotent by right-wing military dictators like Machado and Batista, who were little more than Marionettes whose strings were pulled from Washington.  Hence when the CIA sponsored counter-revolutionaries landed at the Bay of Pigs they were met by an armed Cuban people who crushed them!

Captured Cuban Exiles at Bay of Pigs

A CIA Covert Action Gone Awry

When news of the invasion was reported in the American press it set off a firestorm of protests and acrimonious debates. The Fair Play for Cuba Committee, a group of American activists who expressed solidarity with the Cuban Revolution, organized demonstrations from coast to coast.  Leading American intellectuals spoke out against the Bay of Pigs invasion and chapters of the Fair Play Committee spread like wildfire across college campuses.

Dr. C. Wright Mills, long time Columbia University Professor and one of America’s most distinguished social scientist, was then 80 years old and too ill to attend the demonstrations but he sent a telegram to that was read at one of the largest rallies. “If I were able I would be fighting alongside Fidel Castro” he declared.  However opinion polls taken after news broke of the disastrous American sponsored invasion, even as the Kennedy Administration attempted to deny it at the United Nations, opinion polls revealed that 82% of the American people supported the invasion.

Kennedy was perplexed but pleasantly surprised by the positive public response to his embarrassing diplomatic debacle.  However Robert Williams was outraged by the hypocrisy of so many white Americans favoring supplying arms to help so-called “oppressed” white Cubans regain their “freedom,” but remained silent about the barbaric racist police state tactics that he was living under in the American South.  Hence he wrote a letter to UN Ambassador Stevenson that was read by the Cuban Foreign Minister before the UN General Assembly while Stevenson was sitting there.  The text of William’s letter read:

“Please convey to Mr. Adele Stevenson: Now that the United States has proclaimed support for people willing to rebel against oppression, oppressed Negroes of the south urgently request tanks, artillery, bombs, money and the use of American airfields and white mercenaries to crush the racist tyrants who have betrayed the American Revolution and the Civil War.  We also request prayers for this undertaking.”

Robert F. Williams

The letter was embarrassment enough, but to make matters even worse for the American Ambassador the Cuban Foreign Minister turned to him and said derisively: “I would like to ask Mr. Stevenson what would happen if the government of the United States, which claims to be the champion of democracy, dared to arm not only the Negros in the cotton fields of the South, or right here in Harlem?” Scholars have uncovered a Top Secret cable from Stevenson to Secretary of State Dean Rusk that reveals his ignorance of the Bay of Pigs invasion, as he laments the fact that he was not provided talking points by the State Department beforehand, so that he would not look like a stumble bum trying to respond to these issues.

A Puzzled Steveson Unsure of what to Say

An object of ridicule, trying to defend the indefensible

Robert William’s response foreshadowed a statement of unequivocal support for the Cuban Revolution and denunciation of the invasion by a wide range of distinguished Afro-American intellectuals, lawyers, artists, activist, preachers, et al.  Titled “Cuba: A Declaration of Conscience by Afro-Americans,” and published in the Baltimore Afro-American, a nationally distributed black owned and edited newspaper, it declared:

“Because we have known oppression, because we have suffered more than other Americans, because we are still fighting for our own liberation from tyranny, we Afro-Americans have the right and the duty to raise our voices against the forces of oppression that now seek to crush a free people linked to us by the bonds of blood and common heritage.” The document went on to boldly warn: “Afro-Americans, don’t be fooled – the enemies of Cuba are our enemies, the Jim Crow bosses of this land where we are still denied our rights.”

 This document was signed by black American intellectuals and activists ranging from Robert Williams,  to  Leroi Jones – who became Amiri Baraka – to Dr. WEB DuBois, and its undeniable truth posed a dilemma for the US in its “Cold War” struggle with Communist Russia to win the hearts and minds of the non-white peoples in the emerging nations of Africa and Asia – whose UN delegates had ridiculed the American Ambassador with laughter when the Cuban Foreign minister put the questions to him regarding arming oppressed Afro-Americans and it was telecast around the world.  The Russians made sure everybody in the Third saw it.

Although it is little understood by most Americans, black or white, the US government’s struggle with the communist bloc to win the allegiance of the emergent Third World nations was a major factor in the victories of the Civil Rights Movement in the US.  (See: Civil Rights and Foreign Policy) Hence the Robert Williams story was a nightmare for US diplomacy, especially after he fled into exile in Cuba, where he conducted regular broadcasts into the American South on a program he dubbed “Radio Free Dixie,” named after the American government’s subversive broadcasts into communist countries called “Radio Free Europe.”

These broadcasts could be heard around the world and his pamphlet “The Crusader,” was widely distributed.  I was one of the people who distributed it in the US, as I travelled around the country making speeches under the auspices of the Opportunities Industrialization Center – a manpower training program that began in Philadelphia but spread to 105 cities, and was always located in the heart of black communities.

As a member of the Revolutionary Action Movement, a quasi-underground movement that was the first to advocate and organize for armed struggle during the 1960’s, I had ready access to the Crusader because the Chairman, Max Stanford aka Dr. Muhammad Ahmed, received regular shipments from Cuba, by way of Canada.

I supported Robert Williams from the moment that I learned the details of the Monroe North Carolina struggle in the explosive book “Negros With Guns,” which was based on a series of interviews given on WBAI radio in New York City while Rob was underground on the run from the FBI, who were seeking to arrest him on a trumped up kidnapping charge.  Since it was clear that his only offense was organizing his community to defend themselves against racist white terrorists, all fair minded Americans who understood the facts rallied to Rob’s defense.

Robert and Mable Williams

They Shot it out with the Klan and fled to Cuba

The NAACP in Monroe: Ready to Rumble!

Too hot for the National Office to Handle

Having been expelled from his office as President of the Monroe chapter then abandoned by the NAACP, Williams had relied on the organized left – whom he had met through his activities with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee - to get him first into Canada and then into Cuba.  The aid, comfort, security and communications platform provided to Williams by the revolutionary Cuban government was deeply appreciated by Afro-Americans.

That feeling did not change even after Williams quit Cuba five years later and relocated in the “The People’s Republic of China, where he was treated as a revolutionary hero and hung out with the top levels of the Chinese government, including chairman Mao, at a time when China was largely a mystery to the US State Department.

Radio Free Dixie!

Robert and Mable Williams broadcasting from Cuba

Rob and Chairman Mao

Two Revolutionaries Talkin Revolution

There are various versions of why Rob left Cuba, some say it was the result of a conspiracy by the Russian Communist Party and their American surrogates who for some muddled ideological reasons created suspicions regarding Robert Williams on the part of the Cuban government.  But I find the explanation offered by Dr. Carlos Moore, a black Cuban who had supported the Revolution in an interview conducted on WBAI by this writer.

According to Dr. Moore, it was the great following that Rob enjoyed among Afro-Cubans that began to worry white Cuban Officials, who had made discussions of the race problem a counter-revolutionary act.  And all Rob talked about was the race in America, which began to awaken the racial consciousness of Afro-Cubans.  Dr. Moore went on to become the foremost critic of the Castro government’s policy on race relations, producing many important treatises of varying lengths – including the revelatory books “Castro, The Blacks and Africa” and “Pichun.”

As early as 1960’s, when Afro-American leftist intellectual /activist were completely enamored with the Cuban revolution, Carlos Moore was writing about the persistence of racism in Cuba and the prohibition against honest discussion of the issue.  His persistence in raising the issue got him in trouble with the government and he soon went into exile.  Over the last half century Dr. Moore has lived all over the world, but he has continued to speak out about the unresolved race issues in Cuba, something not only the Cubans don’t want to discuss, Afro-American leftist intellectuals don’t want to talk about either.

As President Obama began to relax the rules regarding travel and investment in Cuba 1n 2009, and the Cuban government embarked on a new economic policy that allowed for the development of private enterprise.  This policy is designed to garner hard currency for foreign exchange in the wake of the devastating economic problems that resulted from the collapse of the Soviet Union, who had been their main benefactor.   As many white Cubans residing in Miami returned home to visit for the first time in decades, Dr. Moore was watching.

He recorded his views of the new policy in a long article published in the McClatchy papers.  It was published on April 21, 2009 under the titled “From Myth to Reality: Putting Context to Cuba’s Racial Divide,” and he observes:

Images of the first batch of Cuban-Americans arriving at Havana’s international airport, since the United States’ lifting of restrictions on travel and remittance-sending to the island, were clear: teary-eyed, Spanish-speaking cousins, laden with gifts and money, for their relatives in Cuba, were all – white! … The spectacle of the white Cuban returnees, however, reveals even more by highlighting what – or rather who – is missing: dark-skinned Cuban faces.”

Dr. Carlos Moore

A Dissident Black Cuban Scholar

Dr. Moore goes on to raise some critical questions.  Among the most telling is:  “How does one explain such a dramatically white homecoming in a country where 62-70% of the population is estimated to be non-white…” After explaining the dramatic difference in wealth between black and white Cuban families he asks:

 “What do these two differing racial realities – largely unacknowledged inside and outside Cuba – portend for the United States’ emerging Open Door policy? In purely human terms, the warming relations between “cousins” on both sides of the Florida straights may be laudable, but certainly not devoid of long-term political implications inside Cuba. To understand why, a new map of Cuba – the real Cuba – will have to be drawn.”

Here Dr.  Moore is alluding to the persistent claim by Afro-Cubans that they are drastically undercounted in the government census.  Again, his critiques of race relations in Cuba were denounced by the Cuban Government, and commentators on the American left.  Moore has been smeared as a right-wing Cuban in league with the reactionary white Cubans in Miami, a CIA agent, everything but a child of God!

However his claims that white racism persists in Cuba; that it is covered up by the government and it is dangerous to discuss it publicly; that white Cubans from Miami are pouring money into the pockets of their relatives in Cuba, and black Cubans are losing ground – the arguments that got him run out of post-revolutionary Cuba, has recently been echoed by a prominent Afro-Cuban intellectual in an article published in the Sunday edition of the March 24 New York Times, over three years after Dr. Moore’s report in the McClatchy papers.

Titled “For Blacks In Cuba, the Revolution Hasn’t Begun,” Roberto Zurbano tells us:

“Racism in Cuba has been concealed and reinforced in part because it isn’t talked about.  The government hasn’t allowed racial prejudice to be debated or confronted politically or culturally, often pretending instead that it didn’t exist.  Before 1990 Black Cubans suffered a paralysis of economic mobility while, paradoxically, the government decreed the end of racism in speeches and publications.  To question the extent of racial progress was tantamount to a counter-revolutionary act.  This made it almost impossible to point out the obvious: racism is alive and well.”

On the question of the economic position of Afro-Cubans, Mr. Zurbano reports:

“If the 1960’s, the first decade after the revolution, signified opportunity for all, the decades that followed demonstrated that not everyone was able to have access to and benefitted from those opportunities.  It’s true that the 1980’s produced a generation of black professionals, like doctors and teachers, but these gains were demolished in the 1990’s, as blacks were excluded from lucrative sectors like hospitality.  Now in the 21^st century, it has become all too apparent that the black population is underrepresented at universities, and in spheres of economic and political power, and overrepresented in the underground economy, in the criminal sphere, and in marginal neighborhoods.”

Mr. Zurbano explains the role of the exile community in the US – those smiling alabaster faces at the airport – in the rising prosperity of White Cubans, even as black Cubans sink deeper into poverty.  “Most remittances from abroad – the Miami area, the nerve center of the mostly white exile community – go to white Cubans.  They tend to live in upscale houses which can easily be converted into Restaurants – the most common kind of private business in Cuba.”

In formulating a solution to Cuba’s problem of racial inequity, Mr. Zurbano argues:

“An important first step would be to finally get an accurate count of Afro-Cubans.  The black population is far larger than the spurious numbers of the most recent censuses.  The number of blacks on the street undermines, in the most obvious way, the numerical fraud that puts us at less than one fifth of the population.  Many people forget that in Cuba, a drop of white blood can – if only on paper – make a Mestizo or white person, out of someone who in social reality falls in neither of these categories.  Here, the nuances of skin color are a tragicomedy that hides longstanding racial conflicts.”

A content analysis of the major themes and conclusions in this analytical essay by Mr. Zurbano will reveal that they are virtually identical to those that Dr. Moore has been arguing for decades, and mirror his take on the Cuban scene in the 2009 essay cited above.  For telling this unvarnished tale of race relations in Cuba, Mr. Zurbano has been removed from his influential post as Editor at Casa d La Americas.

Like Carlos, for telling the truth about racism in post-revolutionary Cuba…he has been sentenced to silence.  That’s one of the main reasons why more Afro-American scholars and journalists should follow Jay Z and Byonce’s example and go see for themselves!   Incidentally, Jigga has already responded to Rubio and his fellow GOP haters with a rap, which reduced to its essence is just an elaborate way of saying “Kiss my rich black ass”….to which I say OLE!!!

Checkin Out the Scene in Cuba

Down to Earth Superstars

 

*********************

Playthell G. Benjamin

Harlem, New York

April 12, 2013

 

On Django UnChained

          

Jamie Fox, Leonardo Dicaprio and

A Wagnarian Saga about Slavery and a  Good Movie!

As is to be expected of a film that chooses a controversial subject – in this case the enslavement of Africans in America – Django Unchained has sparked an emotional debate. The loudest voices in the debate naturally belongs to intellectuals, who are most likely to dissect the film with weighty critiques.  Hence for one who is given to penning weighty polemics on important issues about politics and culture, it is with the greatest reluctance that I have decided not to jump body and soul into the critical debate and spar with my fellow polemicists.   However I cannot resist pointing out that much of the critical commentary is not about the movie at all.

For instance, after reading the critique by Ishmael Reed, a great novelist and brilliant essayist, it seemed to me that he decided to use the movie to not only whip Quentin Tarrantino for all the sins of the movie industry ad infinitum, but also to use the film as a weapon to bludgeon a wide range of adversaries with whom he has been waging interminable culture wars.  I mean what the fuck are doing talking about Dr. DuBois’ “Talented Tenth” in a review of a movie about a gun slinging ex-slave on a quest to free his enslaved wife?

It is bad enough that he does not understand the concept in historical context – in spite of my futile efforts to educate him, and I remain ever ready to debate the subject with him in writing – but to burden this movie with that antiquated debate is prime faice absurd!  While I find Ish’s cleaver floggings of intellectual adversaries in his innovative novels – “Yellow Back Radio Broke Down, “Reckless Eyeballing,” “Mumbo Jumbo” “Japanese By Spring,” etc. -   entertaining and has written as much – see my essays on Ishmael on this blog – his critique of this movie published in the Wall Street Journal, of all places, is a colossal bore and more than a bit silly.

In spite of myriad facts, Ishmael’s essay obscures far more than it enlightens.  For instance, at the beginning of the review he says he was turned off before he ever read the script or saw the movie because the studio that was producing it was evidence that it was being produced for a mainstream audience…say what?  This comment reflects a widespread misunderstanding of the movie business, and making movies is a business.

Movies are a commercial product and if they don’t make money the director won’t be making movies and the studio won’t be in business for long, because making money is an imperative for survival in the market place.  The Jewish movie moguls who created Hollywood understood this well, that’s why they were so successful.  One of the main reasons why black movie makers have not succeeded on that scale is because they are operating from a different premise.

The Jews were businessmen whose principle objective was to make money, so they produced movies for the mass i.e. “mainstream” market.  Since that market was white and Christian they made movies about white Christians.  They even created the blond sex goddesses such as May West, Gloria Swanson, Marylyn Monroe, et al.  They hardly ever made movies about Jews, and even required Jewish actors like Bennie Swartz to take Anglicized names like “Tony Curtis.”  And they were roundly criticized for it by Jewish organizations, as the astute Jewish film historian Neal Gabler has adroitly pointed out.

Jack Warner, head of the enormously successful Warner Brothers studio, once remarked that he was in the business of producing popular entertainment, and declared: “It I want to send a message I’ll call Western Union.”  On the other hand black film makers are expected to be messengers for black causes, or to make films for a black audience populated with black characters and concerns.  It is a formula that will generally insure that you don’t make much money.  And if the movie is also burdened with a weighty message at the expense of entertainment values, you will be lucky to break even!

In Django Quinten Tarrantino has found a formula that allowed him to make money and send a weighty message.  What is that message you ask?  Slavery was an evil, decadent, inhumane system of labor.  The slave holding class was not the noble cavalier Knights Margret Mitchell painted in her best-selling novel that became a blockbuster movie “Gone with the Wind” that won multiple Academy Awards.  Rather they were the “front porch Puritans and backyard lechers” who routinely raped black women, that that other southern woman writer Lillian Smith called them in her extraordinary text “Killers of the Dream.”

It also confirmed Dr. Franz Fanon’s thesis that it is therapeutic for the oppressed to kill their oppressors.  It is   a powerful counter-statement to the American Exceptionalists crowd who insist that America is so morally superior to the rest of the world that it justifies an evangelical foreign policy in which Americans can invade other countries in order to impose our values on them! In my view these multiple messages more than compensates for any shortcomings of the movie.

Hence impassioned denunciations of the movie written by black critics like Jessie Williams, a television actor, which was highly praised by Ryan Adams on Awards Chatter.com, strikes me as little more than persnickety nitpicking diatribes that produce more heat than light.  No movie can be all things to all people.  But I am especially annoyed by those white writers who are perturbed that black people like the movie.  It smacks of the worse kind of paternalism, and it reminds me of the old Ibo proverb: “Beware of the stranger who comes to the funeral and cries louder than the bereaved family.”

I have met very few black people who don’t like this movie.  More typical is the reaction of my highly educated 31 year old daughter Makeda and her boyfriend Odogu, a former boxer:  They loved it!  When I was dragging my feet about seeing it she continued to bug me.  She says that Django reminds her of me.  She told me about the scene in the movie where someone said they had never seen a black man on a horse and she thought: “I have seen my daddy riding horses with big hats on all my life…and she knows that I feel just like Django about racist crackers!  And then there is my friend Samaad, who paid to see the movie five times, or a female Filipino who loved seeing Django kill those crackers while rescuing his woman.

The point that intellectuals who hate the movie miss is that for most black Americans, who have always seen black slaves cowering in fear as they are humiliated and victimized by whites, this movie is a personal catharsis.  They are just ecstatic about witnessing a black man kill some whites on the big screen, and the more the merrier- Which. I confess, was also a great part of the movies appeal to me.  But beyond all that, it’s a damn good action/adventure movie, with sharply drawn characters played by actors of star quality, and the difference between good and evil, virtue and vice is as clear as day and night.  It has none of the tortured complexity and ambiguity that intellectuals glory in.

 A Stone Cold Killer on a Mission!

And black viewers loved ever drop of blood he spilled!

Ironically, Ishmael has a black avenging cowboy in his novel “Yellow Back Radio Broke Down, which I found fascinating but a friend of mine who is a novelist and professor of literature dismisses as “a parody of a parody that has nothing to do with the history of blacks in the old west.”  Hence much of art criticism, including the commentary on this film, is a matter of personal perspective and values – a question of personal taste.  And they are certainly entitled to their opinion.

However if this movie is evaluated from the perspective of historical accuracy and the art of making movies for a mass audience, which is how it ought to be evaluated, as commercial melodrama that reflects on a serious subject, it gets a passing grade from me. Critics of the movie have said that the story is not credible, that there is no historical evidence that suggests such a story could have happened.  I say they should hurry up and read Dr. Gerald Horne’s recent book “Negro Comrades of the Crown.”

Not only does he document the many Europeans who visited the US, observed the practice of slavery and responded with a passionate hatred for the slavers in scores of books, but the text is also rife with incidents of ex-slaves slaughtering whites, some rendered in gruesome detail.  He even has a story of an armed ex-slave on a mission to rescue his wife who was still enslaved!  So it is certainly a tale that could have been true.  And that is quite enough to justify the telling.  But lest we forget: This is a feature film, an act of the imagination that can claim artistic license, not a documentary to be viewed as a statement of historical fact.

However this rule can apply even when a feature film treats a specific historical event; as the heated debate around the Chilean film” No,” which depicts the 1988 plebiscite in that country that brought down the murderous military dictator Augusto Pinochet demonstrates.  Directed by Pablo Larrian, the film is based on a play “The Plebiscite,” by Chilean writer Antonio Skarmeta, who also wrote the novel “II Postino,” which was made into an Oscar winning movie.

The film has been roundly criticized by some Chileans who participated in the struggle to defeat Pinochet, Jose Miguel Vivanco, a Chilean who witnessed it all and now serves as the director of Human Rights Watch Americas,  gave the New York Times 2/10/ 13  a different assessment.  He said the film was “a good effort to show a pretty accurate picture of Chile in the 80’s.”  He conceded that there were important events in that struggle that was “not a part of the film at all…but I went to see a movie not a PBS piece.”

This is exactly how Django should be viewed; it gives us a great felling for the cruel inhumanity of slavery and leaves no doubt that it was a crime against humanity.  And thus more than justifies the bloody carnage visited on white slavers by Django.  I do have some criticisms however.  For instance I would have chosen different music for many of the scenes.  In the opening scene I would have used the deeply moving and hauntingly beautiful Afro-American spiritual “Oh Freedom” and engaged the Fisk Jubilee singers to perform it.

And in the scene where the masked nightriders were chasing Django and his German partner, I would have used Wagner’s Ride of the Valkeries, which is great for an action scene featuring galloping horses, and the movie is working with the same German myths about Brunhilde and Siegfried that Richard Wagner built his “music/festival/drama” The Ring around.   Hence when the beautiful talented Kerry Washington says she saw the movie as a quest of a man to rescue his woman while slaying a few dragons in the process, she is right on the money.

Kerry Washington: The face that launched a bloodbath

She gave a moving performance

Indeed Django’s wife, played by Kerry Washington – who was easily the most beautiful woman at the Academy Awards ceremony – spoke German and was named “Broomhilde” – which some black commentators thought was ridiculous – duh?   It was supposed to be, since everything about slavery was ridiculous!  However when the German Doctor /Bounty Hunter explained the story of Siegfried and Brunhilde to Django he was also explaining the main plot of the movie.  It was a clever way of telling the story.

The proof is the reception it has recieved.  The way Austrian actor  Christophe Watz played the character with great wit and charm conjured up the Nazi officer he played in Tarrantino’s last blockbuster movie Inglorious Bastards, which I loved, and reminds us that in Django he created the same cathartic experience for Afro-Americans that he provided for Jews in Inglorious Bastards. And Christophe played the role so well he just won an Oscar for his performance!

The Charming but Deadly Doctor

Christophe Watz and Jamie Fox

However the main criticism I have of the movie is the portrayal of Sam Jackson’s character.  It is a stereotype that is based on a misunderstanding of history and the nature of “Uncle Tom.”  Harriet Beecher Stowe’s character, introduced in the first bestselling American novel “Uncle Tom’s Cabin was an accommodationist who loved his people but in his powerless state was force to play the role of obsequious slave while manipulating the all-powerful white folks.  This was a survival strategy that the great Afro-American poet Paul Laurence Dunbar describes in his poem “While We Wear the Mask.”  It was represented in slave culture as “putting on ol massa,” which is to say play the white folks for fools.

This practice was expressed in a slave ditty that has been found all over the slave south :”Got one mind for white folks to see/got another mind I know was really me.  And they don’t know my mind” The character played by Samuel L. Jackson had a bit of this guile bh he more closely resembles Malcolm X’s “House Negro,” in his famous House Negro vs. Field Negro dichotomy.  The problem is that this is an ahistorical analysis because it was the “House Negros” who led the revolts.  That was true then and now.

I am continuously amused when I hear middle class black intellectuals repeat Malcolm’s ahistorical foolishness, because most of the sixties revolutionary leaders ended up as professors or some other middle class professions – and to the lumpen ghetto dwellers  gangsta rappers are the real rebels and they are the “house niggaz.”  It is an irony that somehow escapes them.   Django Unchained perpetuates the myth, because Sam Jackson’s house nigger really does love his master and believes that he is a God-like figure.  This interpretation flies in the face of the conventional wisdom…… but then it’s only a movie.   And when the gorgeous cinemetography is added to its other virtues its a damned good movie at that!

Sam Jackson as House Nigger

 Sam gave a great performance of a stereotyped character

 

******************

Playthell G. Benjamin

Harlem, New York

Fenruary 24th, 2013

Big Willie Rocks tha House!

 

When the Master Player Speaks Everybody Listens

He Told a Round Unvarnished Tale

With wit, erudition and soaring eloquence, Bill Clinton dropped some political science and took the nation to school last night.  In the course of his powerful and learned oration he transformed the esoteric polysyllabic language of policy wonks into epic poetry and mesmerized the audience.  Then he fashioned his rhetoric into a deadly weapon and demolished the pugnacious sophistry of the Grand Obstructionist Party, which has been masquerading as serious argument, and adroitly cast aspersions on their character, ethics and political acumen.  And he did it in grand style.

The audience was amped by the moving speakers that preceded him – representing business, labor, academia, and the women’s movement.  Hence the excitement was palpable; the atmosphere was electric.  The scene was tailor made for a great political polemicist who is also a very able orator.

With his infectious southern charm and rigorous intellect, Bill Clinton told the nation in no uncertain terms why we should reelect President Obama and reject the Republican bid for power.  And the case he made was deadly; it may have killed the Republican dreams of capturing the Oval Office.  Time and again he sparked the audience into rounds of tumultuous applause.  As he spoke I envisioned the Republican strategists, who thought it a good idea to play him up to dis President Obama, sitting at a table with a jug of moonshine and a pistol trying to decide who should put the gun to their head first.

A master of his trade, the art and science of political combat, Silver Tongue Willie skillfully laid out the essence of his argument in his opening statement.  “I want to nominate a man whose own life has known its fair share of adversity and uncertainty,” he intoned.

Continuing to cite the President’s virtues he said: “I want to nominate a man who ran for president to change the course of an already weak economy and then just six weeks before his election, saw it suffer the biggest collapse since the Great Depression, a man who stopped the slide into depression and put us on a long road to recovery, knowing all the while that no matter how many jobs he saved or created, there’d still be millions more waiting, worried about feeding their own kids, trying to keep their hopes alive.”

Then he celebrated the Presidents beliefs and personal judgement.  ”I want to nominate a man who’s cool on the outside but who burns for America on the inside.  I want a man who believes with no doubt that we can build a new American dream economy, driven by innovation and creativity, by education….I want a man who had the good sense to marry Michelle Obama.”  My sentiments exactly!

After succinctly laying out the major themes of his argument, Clinton filled in the details with lawyerly precision and professorial erudition, spiked by a generous employment of humor delivered with brilliant comedic timing.  Elegant standard English was interspersed with folksy aphorisms rendered in witty southern colloquialisms, buttressed by powerful representative anecdotes.  His choice of facts in his comparative analysis went straight to the heart of the matter.

For instance when he pointed out that since 1961 the Republicans have held the Presidency longer than the Democrats but twice as many jobs were created under Democratic presidents.  And when he said of contemporary job creation: “President Obama four and a half million, the Republican congress Zero!”  He might also have added that the two great collapses of the American economy also took place under Republicans…who were pursuing the same policies Mitt Romney is advocating now.

But no matter, as the situation stood Big Willie put the Republican’s business in the street; aired their dirty laundry, and whipped their butts like runaway slaves.  Since his administration is a model of economic success, the former President was entirely believable when he said that no president, himself included, could have repaired the vast economic carnage from eight years of Republican mismanagement in just four years.  And he is eminently believable when he praises Barack’s policies and implores us to keep him on the job for four more years.

 United They Stand

A Formidable Tandum

**********************

Playthell G. Benjamin

Harlem, New York

August 6, 2012

Barack’s Secret Weapon!

          

Michelle brings a Message of Faith, hope and Charity

 The Democrats Show True Diversity

IfAnn Romney is Mitt’s Secret Weapon, Michelle is Barack’s most powerful comrade in arms.  And if placed in head to head combat Miss Ann would be like a lone knight with bad eyesight, armed with a dull sword, riding a lame horse attacking a motorized regiment equipped with rifled cannon!   This is because Michelle is the real deal, a brilliant daughter of the working class up from the masses; Miss Ann is a privileged plutocrat whose feigned concern for the poor and working class is as fake as her bleached blond hair.

It was altogether fitting that the First Lady should be introduced by a middle class mom who has four children serving in the military. Politically it served two purposes. First it reminded people that our First Lady is a tireless worker on behalf of military families.  I can think of no first Lady who has so committed herself to this vital constituency.

The second message, and by far the most powerful, was what it tells us about who is actually fighting the wars that tough talking Republican chicken hawks start – while pulling every string to get deferments for themselves!  Dirty Dick Cheyney, the ultimate chicken hawk, who never saw a war he couldn’t profiteer off, got five deferments during the Vietnam war.

Tall, teasing brown, beautiful beyond the language of Chaucer, Shakespeare and the King James Bible to describe – even when employed by a seasoned wordsmith like me – Michelle Obama told some indisputable truths. The most important of which is that service to the people is the highest function of citizenship and is a far better qualification for a President than the ability to make money.

It is a tribute to her intelligence and diplomatic acumen that she never said this literally.  She demonstrated it by offering the example of her husband.  And in so doing she gave us a glimpse of her own sterling character, because it is obvious that she had her choice of men, rich or poor, wise man of fool.  There are men all over the world who look at this earth goddess and pine: “Would that the God’s had made me such a woman!”

Following a magnificent lineup of Americans who hail from modest circumstances – Including Lilly Ledbetter and San Antonio Mayor Castro – all of whom gave wonderful speeches, the First Lady’s speech went straight to the heart of the matter before the American people. By reminding the nation that Barack turned down high paying jobs with powerful law firms after he graduated from Harvard Law, in order to work with structurally employed people dealing with the fact that their jobs have disappeared.

Then she summed it up with the comment: “Barack does not measure success by how much money he makes…but how many people he can help!”  This underlined her central message: Service to the least of us, not the accumulation of personal wealth, is the mark of a great leader.  Indeed it is the standard set by Jesus Christ; who’s hallowed name the Republicans never cease to invoke – even as they repudiate his teachings by their deeds!  Shameless idolaters and blasphemers taking the Lord’s name in vain.

Last week the Republicans put up a fake show of diversity that was really a carefully orchestrated televised production designed to deceive the public, an optical illusion. And they were getting away with it so long as the camera’s stayed focused on the stage, where they paraded a multi-cultural, multi-racial, gender diverse succession of speakers.

But once the camera’s panned the audience, we saw the truth of the matter: the delegates were mostly old, white men – the most racist, sexist, culturally backward segment of the electorate.  And the Republican Party Platform reflects it.  The Democrat’s audience reflected the speakers – a true portrait of the gorgeous human mosaic that is the American people.

It was the real deal, no bait and switch or false advertising here, and their platform reflects it.  And there was no better choice to carry that message to the world than our marvelous First Lady - who along with the dynamic Massachusettes Governor Duval Patrick, who gave a real barn burner of a speech that put the Republicans on trial – is  the ultimate representative of the wisdom of investing in the public sector.

Governor Deval Patrick

He put the Republican Party on Trial

********************

 Playthell G. Benjamin

Harlem, New York

September 5, 2012

Rudy Giuliani Disses Joe Biden

A hypocritical, racist, blowhard

 A Case of the Pot Maligning the Kettle

As I listened to Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani holding forth on Face The Nation, CBS’ long running Sunday morning news and public affairs show, I thought of the race baiting politics and racist policies Giuliani employed when he was Mayor of New York.  I was torn between impulses of laughter and rage as Rudy said of vice President Biden “I’ve never seen a vice president that has made as many mistakes, said as many stupid things. I mean there’s a real fear if God forbid he ever had to be entrusted with the presidency whether he really has the mental capacity to handle.”  I could hardly believe my ears: Rudy Giuliani questioning Joe Biden’s intelligence and judgment: What Chutzpah!

Evidently, like his cronies in the Grand Obstructionist Party, Rudy thinks the public is either suffering from amnesia or they are too stupid to recognize that they are being played.  Rudy sounded like a reformed whore who has become holier than thou.  After all, based on his criticism of Biden he must believe that we have forgotten his scurrilous history.  Let me refresh your memories.

This is the guy who nearly incited a police riot outside City Hall with reckless rhetoric when he was running for Mayor.  The elegant, gracious, politically astute David Dinkins was Mayor and much of the untutored white ethnic workin class mob felt the same way about him they feel about President Obama: like the world had turned upside down and things were falling apart.  Rudy Giuliani recognized this anger and sought to harness it with barely concealed race baiting rhetoric.

Since this was New York City in the late twentieth century and not Alabama in the 1960’s, Rudy stopped short of employing racial epithets.  He didn’t call anybody “niggers;” instead, he smiled and talked of fairness based on merit not “racial quotas,” while enacting some of the most racist policies of any New York Mayor in the twentieth century.

His sins were all the more perfidious because he had served as the Federal Attorney for the Southern District of New York, thus he was well aware of the wholesale economic discrimination against women and non-white minorities in securing contracts to provide products and services to the City Government – the largest contractor in this gilded city.

Not only did he do nothing to stop the practice – which was in violation of federal equal opportunity laws, he ordered all government agencies to stop keeping records of the race, ethnicity or gender of those awarded city contracts. In other words Rudy systematically destroyed the evidentiary record which provides the factual basis for class action suits by the injured parties.

In other words he rendered the most effective weapon victims of race and gender discrimination could employ to gain legal redress.  Hence solidifying institutional discrimination in New York city government. Yet this racist charlatan now lectures Joe Biden on racism?  The Veep hasn’t a racist bone in his body!

When we consider the question of judgment the “America’s Mayor” fares perhaps even worse.  Lest we forget, this is the guy who appointed Bernard Kerik to Police Commissioner and then recommended him to head the massive Homeland Security Agency. Fortunately he was thwarted in that ambition when the FBI investigated his fitness for the job and discovered Bernie was mobbed up!  Yet his benefactor, self-righteous Rudy, swore he hadn’t a clue about his protégés mob ties; for which he is presently doing from now until in the slammer.

But the most powerful statement about who Rudy Giuliani is came from his daughter.  When Rudy was the leading challenger for the Republican presidential candidacy in 2008, his daughter publicly endorsed Barack Obama!

*********************

Playthell George Benjamin

Harlem, New York

Auguat 22, 2012

 

Please Stay In the Race Toddy Boy!

                    He says women can’t get pregnant during rape!

 

Notes on the War Against Women

If the realty it magnifies were not so tragic, Congressman Todd Akin’s statement on women and rape would be hilarious.  Akin, who is the Republican challenger for the Senate Seat of Democrat Claire McKaskil, was enjoying a commanding lead in the race.  But in a fortnight he provoked a swelling chorus from the national Republican Party to quit the race. This rejectionist movement is led by Republican Paul Brown of Massachusetts in the Senate, as they all run for cover to try and avoid the toxic fallout.

Many believe if Akin continues in the race they will lose a seat they had already chalked up in the win column. And the Republican National Committee has announced that no funds will be invested in his Senate bid.  Yet, as I write, Congressman Akin is announcing on Mike Huckabee’s show – the former Republican presidential candidate who had endorsed him –  that he shall not quit the race.  I say bully for you Todd!  Don’t let those Washington part hacks push you around!  What a marvelous gift you are to the Democrats.

Mitt Romney, aka “Mr. Chameleon,” is his usual stiff, cautious, amoral, phony baloney self; pooting around equivocating and accidently exposing his true character. The problem is that the Republicans are already 17 points behind President Obama with women in the coming elections, and Todd Akin’s basic view of reproductive rights is the view of the Republican Party.  And that the Republican attack on their reproductive rights is simply the advance guard of a full-fledged war on women.

The scurrilous attack on law student Sandra Fluke by Rush Limbaugh on National radio – when he called her a whore and said she should allow us to watch her having sex on television.  He was defended by many Republicans and Mitt barely said a word in condemnation.  But this contemptuous attitude toward women is reflected in the Republican Party’s hostility towards the Lilly Ledbetter Act outlawing wage discrimination against women.

Their contempt is mirrored in the assault on Planned Parenthood which provides free cancer screenings for a multitude of women who could not otherwise afford them.  Hence is the fear that this multiple assault on the status  of women will finally be viewed in its entirety, not a sincere change of heart, that’s driving the male chauvinist in the GOP: “Grand Oppressor Party.”

Akin’s  claimed  in “legitimate rapes” women don’t get pregnant, and he claimed to have medical evidence showing that women’s bodies had the ability to shutdown it’s reproductive machinery in a real rape.  He also said that he opposed abortion even if the rape was real, and justified this outrageous anti-woman statement with the argument that it is the rapist not the unborn child who should be punished for the crime.

This statement sparked a firestorm, yet in reality it is the position of the national Republican Party. Committing oneself to a policy of forcing a woman to carry a baby to term even if it is the result of rape or incest has become a litmus test for Republican candidates in large sections of the USA today.  It is so common out there in the red state boonies that a reactionary creep like Todd Akin felt completely at ease spouting such dangerous anti-woman drivel.  And the clueless old fart actually looks surprised at the outrage it has provoked.

Consider Akin’s response: “I made couple of mistakes,” says Congressman Akin, “I made that statement in error.  What I said was ill-conceived…And I also know that women do become pregnant from rape…and I want to apologize for anyone I’ve hurt.”  For anyone who has actually seen the video tape of the statement – which has been looped everywhere in the mass media – the Congressman’s attempt at apology must seem too little too late.

I was overjoyed when Toddy announced earlier today that he intends to stay in the race no matter what the Washington apparatchiks have to say.  He is a gift that wil never stop giving….for the Democrats!  So I hope he continues to believe that his candidacy is an instrument of God’s will, and fervently press forward in pursuit of his goal. He says he does not need the support of the Republican establishment because his passionate grass roots support will put him over the top.  I say onward Christian soldier!

*****************

Playthell George Benjamin

Harlem, New York

August 21, 2012

 

 

Stop Whining Annie…

An arrogant, Over privileged, Stepford Wife

 ….Just Show Us Yo Tax Returns!

If, as we are told, Ann Romney is Mitt’s secret weapon, this joker is in big trouble.  As questions swirl around his tax returns, which are now routinely referred to as Mitts “Secret” tax returns, Miss Ann responds to questions from reporters about being more transparent with their tax returns over the years by becoming petulant and unhinged.

Miss Ann is a very bad actor and therefore cannot disguise her contempt for those beneath her social status who are impertinent enough to insist that she answer questions about what she and Mitt chooses to do with their money- which they have been hiding in a lot of suspicious places.  So what if the press is the eyes and ears of the people, and the reporters are just doing their jobs?

Miss Ann postures like a dowager speaking to servants as she announces in no uncertain terms that they are not telling us another word about their wealth and how it is taxed.  Yet she seems to be totally unaware of how she is coming across to those viewers who have even half a functioning brain.

For despite her haughty attitude, she looks frightened and confused; like a deer caught in the headlights of a tractor trailer bearing down on her.  When the camera zooms in close, the look of anxiety on Miss Ann’s face would make a good spot in the airline commercials that asks “Wanna get away?”

In two major television interviews she has gone from bad to worse when asked about releasing additional tax returns.  On one occasion she said to Robin Roberts, a veteran Afro-American reporter: “We have told you people enough about what we have and how we live.”  And in a later interview on NBC’s Rock Center she said emphatically that there would be no more tax returns because they will just be used by their enemies to pick them apart.  “We have paid everything the law requires of us,” she announced.

When the interviewer asked did she think the public had a right to know how much taxes they paid, since after all her husband was running for President; and would soon be debating tax policy with President Obama, Miss Ann fairly spat out her incredulous reply.  “Haven’t you seen what they are doing to us?” She asked.

Then she defiantly declared that the only thing releasing more tax returns would do is “give them more ammunition to use against us.” With an air of stony resolve, Miss Ann announced on national television that “There will be no more returns!”   My Harvard trained tax attorney, who spent 20 years working for the IRS, tells me they are definitely hiding something…. and it is almost certainly immoral and unethical.  The only question is if it’s illegal.

Despite her fumbling attempts to make nice, this is a cold blooded bitch.  I can easily hear her say of the struggling poor, the people who need the food supplement programs her husband vows to slash: “Let them eat cake!”  Miss Ann strikes me as being as clueless as Marie Antoinette; whose attitude caused her to literally lose her head.  And she seems as callous as “Hard Hearted Hanna” a dirty bitch in Savanna, who was observed standing on dry land, pouring water on the head of a drowning man!  Mitt’s weapon is not only secret….it’s deadly.

The Sport of Plutocrats

Miss Ann and her dancing beast

     

******************

Playthell G. Benjamin

Harlem, New York

August 17, 2012

Mr. Chameleon

A Shameless Hypocrite

 To be or not to be: That’s the Question

When Mitt Romney is not playing Mr. Mum with his taxes, or his deal making as CEO of the Winter Olympics, he’s playing Mr. Chameleon with his politics; changing colors to suit the political environment.  It’s becoming harder and harder to discern his true colors, and we are left to ponder a mystery.  The more we see of Mitt the less we know about who he really is.

While it is clear to me that the public is being played for suckers by cold blooded flim flam men, whose job is to confuse fact with fiction, I cannot escape the sickening feeling that The Mittster and his mythmakers might just get away with it.  The thing about chameleons is that you have to pay close attention in order to notice that they are changing colors.  And many Americans, perhaps most, are not paying attention to the unfolding political drama at all.

Perplexed and bewildered by the avalanche of political ads preaching different versions of reality, the average voter gets turned off and seeks solace in bread and circuses; often ending up voting for a candidate because they think he would make a good beer drinking partner… or they just feel good vibes emanating from him.

But those of us who are paying attention see a chameleon whose political allegiance is dictated by expedience and changes colors to fit the situation. We are witnessing a dramatic demonstration of Mitt’s tricknology on his Israeli sojourn; where his philosophy appears to be “when in Israel think like the Israelis.”   There are three poignant examples that stand out.  First there is Mitt’s praise of the Israeli nation.  “To step foot into Israel is to step foot into a nation that began with an ancient promise made in this land,” Romney declared.

He went on to observe: “The historian Paul Johnson, writing on the 50th anniversary of the creation of the Jewish state, said that over the course of Israel’s life, 100 completely new independent states had come into existence. “Israel is the only one whose creation can fairly be called a miracle”…It is a deeply moving experience to be in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel.”

The problem with this fulsome praise is that it contradicts the fundamental beliefs of the Mormon Church in which Mitt is a High Priest.  It is central to the beliefs of the Church of Latter Day Saints that upon his Resurrection Jesus Christ came to what is now the United States to preach his new Covenant, and that the new Zion (Israel) would arise here in America!

Hence if he is true to the teachings of his church the Israeli’s are apostates – preachers of a false doctrine.  It cannot be otherwise because the Mormon and Israeli doctrines are irreconcilable.  But since Mitt is as secretive about his religious beliefs as he is about his taxes most Americans didn’t recognize that Willard Mitt Romney was lying his butt off as he praised the Jews in Israel.  But he was equally duplicitous in his effusive praise of the Israeli economy and medical system.

The top marginal tax rate for Israeli’s earning over 125,000 dollars is 48% and the medical system is socialized: it is free, universally available to every citizen, and is paid for by a tax levied on all tax payers.  These are the very things that Romney is so adamantly against here at home; he is building his campaign on opposition to them.  Has nobody ever told Mitt that charity begins at home: or is he just a phony baloney lying so and so!

***************

Playthell G. Benjamin

Harlem, New York

Augudt 1, 2012

Reflections on the Stop and Frisk Policy…..

 The Crowd Was Vociferous in Denunciation of Police

Will Our Communities be Safer Without It?

As I stood beneath the imposing statue of Duke Ellington at the intersection of 110^th St. and Fifth Avenue a few weeks ago, watching the swelling crowd begin their Silent March down Fifth Avenue to 79^th Street, protesting the Stop and Frisk policy of the NYPD, I wondered if we would really be better off without it.

Listening to snatches of anti-police diatribes, uttered by well-meaning people, I thought of the nihilistic gun wielding criminals who are turning or communities into free fire zones, and reflected on Frederick Douglass’s opening remarks from his 1875 speech on the Washington Mall; where he dedicated the Freedman’s Memorial to Abraham Lincoln.

“I am here today only because I will not have it said that the colored man is a man that can show no gratitude,” Douglass said as he damned the object of veneration he had been called to celebrate with faint praise.  He went on to say “Truth is beautiful and proper at all times and in all places.”  My sentiments exactly!

I had to be at the march because I couldn’t let others demand justice for black men and I not stand with them.  And when thinking about what I should say regarding the great Silent March to end the Mayor’s “Stop and Frisk” policy,  Like Douglass, I decided to tell the truth as I see it….even if it goes over like a lead balloon with the crowd.

The truth is that I have misgivings about ending the program; because it is an incontestable fact that that the greatest danger to black men comes from gun wielding black male criminals; not white policemen, or even the armed white racist militia types who like to parade around dressed in combat camouflage fatigues, wielding guns and selling woff tickets.

While the critics contend that black and Hispanic communities are selected based on racist criteria, Mayor Bloomberg insists that communities are chosen for Stop and Frisk programs based on the incidence of gun violence and robberies committed at gunpoint.  And that the purpose of the program is to protect the law abiding citizens in those communities against murderous criminals.

The Mayor’s remarks were greeted with enthusiastic applause by the congregations of black churches – located in crime ridden Brooklyn communities where the stop and frisk program is in full effect -when he said the program should be mended not ended. The numbers support the Mayors argument about how targeted communities are selected.  For instance stop and frisk exist in mostly black Brownsville and not in mostly white Bay Ridge, because gun violence in Brownsville is 18 times higher than in Bay Ridge.

Just yesterday there was a march in Brooklyn protesting the shooting of a three year old boy who was caught in the crossfire between two gun wielding maniacs. However the purpose of mass demonstrations is to present demands to authorities who have the power to grant redress, or appeal to the conscience of your oppressor.  Which begs the question: who was yesterday’s demonstration addressed to: the conscience of gun wielding criminals?

If so…well, good luck with that.  To me it is the definition of a fool’s errand.  I am convinced that the criminals watch these demonstrations on TV and are only moved by the calls for ending Stop and Frisk; while polishing their guns singing “Happy Days are Here Again.”  I understand that there are real questions regarding abuse of authority by police that must be addressed; yet it is a far less evil than having murderous maniacs running amuck in my neighborhood.   Alas, I agree with the Mayor: Mend it don’t end it!

And how shall we mend it?  Well, let us consider the issues raised by the Stop and Frisk program.  At the end of the day, after all the grievances have been aired, it boils down to two issues: the lack of courtesy and professionalism on the part of white cops, much of which is fueled by racist attitudes, and the procedure violates the constitutional rights of law abiding men who are going about their business and have committed no offense that would warrant police action against them.  Both are reasonable complaints that go to the heart of our rights as citizens.  But that is only a part of the story.

The problem that the police are asked to manage is no walk in the park.  These neighborhoods are in an undeclared state of emergency, where gun casualties exceed those in Afghanistan and Iraq at the height of the war.  A young black man has a greater chance of dying by gunfire at the hands of a gun wielding black male criminal than an American soldier on the front lines of two wars!  This is the real shame and outrage; the internecine war raging in black communities across this nation.

In view of this fact a really racist program would be to just ignore this situation and say “Let the dumb niggers do the rest of us a favor and wipe each other out!  Why spend good tax money to save niggers when it could be put to much more productive use.” Then adopt an aggressive campaign of harassing black men whenever they leave predominantly black areas.  The fact of the matter is that the police have been placed into a war zone where a protracted low intensity war is going on and without their presence chaos would ensue!   These are the facts of the matter.

I have friends who go crazy and foam at the mouth whenever this issue is discussed and I point these things out and say I am not in favor of ending the Stop and Frisk program.  They are engaging in self-deception alas; since they know these things are true and that they are constantly looking over their shoulder when walking the streets of the hood late at night – if they still live in the hood – and they are afraid for the women and elderly in their families.

And if they have any brains they want to keep their kids out of most schools in the hood, where the little thugs who are always angry because their incompetent parents have neglected or abused them, or both, will not only prevent them from learning but pose a danger to their physical safety.

When my children were going up in New York me and their mother decided whether we would continue to live in New York, a city we dearly love, based on what schools we could get our kids in!  And although we did manage to get them into great schools – we wanted them to go to public schools because based upon what I had seen of the psychological damage to black children and even working class whites who attend ritzy private schools, I thought the cure was worse than the disease – every morning I worried about their safety going to and from school.

And it was not the white policemen on the beat that worried me: It was the black thugs and criminals!   I told my children the police are their friends and if they had any problem go immediately to the first policeman they see and tell them.  I regard anybody who told their children anything different as a moron and an incompetent parent!

The bottom line with me on this question is that I don’t think fostering hatred and suspicion of all policemen is good for the law abiding black community trying to go about their business and lead a normal life.  The only element in the black community this paranoid hatred of the police favors are the criminals…all of whom become “political prisoners” once they are incarcerated.

Just consider the “don’t snitch” code that has become so pervasive in black urban communities; who does this idea favor?  Consider the meaning of this idea.  I am supposed to watch a criminal assault my neighbor, break into their house, rape their wife or daughter, and refuse to report them to the police?  This is a prescription for chaos not community; it is the antithesis of civilization…it is barbarism.

There is no end to the horror stories of gun violence in black communities.  Just recently I was sitting here writing when suddenly I heard a burst of gunfire, then looked out of my window and discovered corpses lying on the pavement.  And I just heard gunfire outside my window as I’m writing this commentary.  It’s about 5: o-clock in the morning and I heard my neighbor leave about ten minutes before; which would give him time to get down on the street.  I’m hoping he wasn’t the victim.   There are law abiding black citizens in cities all over the county who face similar anxieties about gun violence every day.  It’s everywhere!

The Crime Scene at My Front Door

These cups mark the spot where two men murdered

A distinguished black journalist in Philadelphia told me he had guns pointed in his face three times in a week because the other motorist didn’t think he got off the light fast enough.  A dear friend is grieving over his four year old grandson who was shot through the head while playing in front of his Camden New Jersey home when two maniacs started shooting at each other while children were in the line of fire.

And my brother-in-law told me about friends of his being robbed at gunpoint in two different nightclubs last Saturday night in Harrisburg PA, when armed robbers took over the club and fleeced everybody.  There are stories like this everywhere, just check out the recent documentary movie on gun violence in the black community in Chicago.

As bad as things are with gun violence in certain New York neighborhoods it is less than New Orleans, Chicago, Philadelphia, Harrisburg, and several other cities.  And one could make a persuasive argument that the stop and frisk program accounts for the difference.  Hence ending this program may well spare black and Hispanic men the sense of embarrassment and harassment that many feel when subjected to stop and frisk, but it won’t save their lives.  For nobody supports ending stop and frisk more than the gun toting criminals.

In view of the fact that we are living in war zones the constitutional arguments against the stop and frisk program leaves me cold.  During the American Civil War Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of Habeus Corpus, a basic constitutional protection that requires the government to formally state their charges against you within 72 hours after arrest.

This allows your lawyer to argue for dismissal, or bail at arraignment.  Absent this protection the government can detain you in jail indefinitely.  When “The Great Emancipator” was accused of subverting the Constitution he famously replied: “The constitution is not a suicide pact!”

Since I am not in favor of ending Stop and Frisk” how shall we mend it?  Since the constitutional question could be nullified by declaring a state of emergency in certain cities – a measure I called for in my neighborhood in a big village voice cover story during the crack plague of the 1980’s why my children were little kids, which I think would be far worse than Stop and Frisk, lets address the question of police behavior and abuse of authority by power drunk or racist cops.  This problem could be ameliorated by filming all Stop and Frisk incidents.

The cameras can be mounted in the cars, and policeman on the beat should be required to carry small hand held cameras.  This would insure the “professionalism and courtesy” the NYPD says it is committed to. In view of the reign of terror presently being conducted by black criminals in black communities all over this nation, this is a far superior alternative to the terminating this program.  This is why I say without equivocation: Mend it don’t end it!

Well meaning….but misguided?

The gunmen love this! 

*********************

Playthell George Benjamin

Harlem,  New York

July 13, 2012

 

The Islamist Claim Victory in Egypt!

  Muhamed Morsi, Egypt First Islamist President?

 

Now What Happens Next?

The comedian Paul Mooney invented a character called “Negrodamous;” a prescient black man who can predict the future.  I am beginning to feel more and more like that guy…except my stories ain’t funny.  Alas, it is now apparent that my predictions on both the Occupy Wall Street Movement and the Egyptian upheaval were right on the money.

My prediction that the apolitical character of the Occupy Wall Street movement would insure they would end up like Jack the Bear, making tracks but getting nowhere in terms of diminishing the power of the Plutocrats has certainly come true. One part of the segmented leadership of OWS has announced that the only solution to American Problems is “world Revolution,” and another has decided that challenging the seat of progressive Democratic Congresswoman Lydia Valesquez is what they should be about.

Although the Egyptian upheaval, which served as their model, is a far more complex political phenomenon; I managed to get that right too.  From the outset I warned that we should be wary of uncritically embracing the popular resistance movement, because it contained dangerous elements that could be propelled to power.  This is because like all mass social movements, the Egyptian leadership was polycepalous and segmented; which means they have many leaders representing different factions.

While they all agree that overthrowing the Mubarak government was a vital necessity; any basis for unity between secular liberals and conservative Islamist stopped there.  Although all factions said they wanted an end to tyranny the Devil lurked in the details.  I suspected they were sleeping in the same bed but dreaming different dreams.

Some thought me cynical when I pointed out the naiveté of a young female doctor in a miniskirt interviewed by the New York Times, who gushed over how helpful members of the Muslim Brotherhood were in supporting the idealistic youths who thought they were ushering in a western style liberal /secular democracy.

Other’s thought me a reactionary when I sympathized with the middle class Egyptian women who came out in support of President Honsi Mubarak and the military, against the “revolutionaries” who advocated popular democracy.  As highly educated women they foresaw the danger of an Islamic takeover in a popular election and they knew the horrors that befell women, especially modern women like them, everywhere Islamic fundamentalists take power.

The military men understand it too, that’s why they have steadfastly kept Islamists from taking power ever since Egypt’s first President, Abdel Gamal Nasser, a military man trained at Britain’s elite Sandhurst military academy, hung the theologian Syyid Qutb, the ideological leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, in 1966.  What we are witnessing in Egypt is a reflection of the FLN’s policy in Algeria, where the military overturned a popular election that chose an Islamic party, and took control.  And as I have written repeatedly: The only impediment to an Islamist takeover in all of these Muslim countries is the secular military caste.

Hence with a victory by Muhamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, who claimed to have won by a million votes on Monday, and Ahmed Shafiq, former President Hosni Mubarak’s last appointed Prime Minister, Claiming to have won on Tuesday, we shall soon see if Morsi becomes the first Islamist President that’s allowed to take power by the military strongmen in a Sunni Muslim country.

With the announcement by the Military elite that they will be the architects of the new Egyptian Constituition, in order to keep it a secular document and prevent the institution of Sharia law, and that only the military high command can remove a military commander…it looks like de ja vu all over again with a faceoff by the theocrats and military secularists that marked the beginning of modern Egyptian politics.

This conflict presents President Obama with a dilemma: shall he support the results of Egypt’s first democratic election….or cast his fate with the military strongmen; exactly where America’s support has been for the last half century.  We shall see.

 Where the Real Power Resides

The Nemisis of the Islamist

************

Playthell Benjamin

Harlem, New York

June 20, 2012