Blog Archives

State Farm Insurance: How Capitalism Makes Criminals Legal

3/25/2017

First off, the insurance industry is without question a criminal enterprise. Think about it. Here is a product that you pay faithfully for every month, yet you are afraid to use it. You are afraid because insurance is the ultimate pay for protection/extortion industry meaning you pay for it, but if you have to use it, your situation in many ways becomes worse. This is especially today when many apartment complexes and storage facilities are forcing you to buy insurance to rent their facilities. Then, on top of that, the entire insurance industry within the capitalist system was launched based on the concept of offering the purchasers of African people the opportunity to insure their new "property" during the transatlantic slave system. So, just based on that reality alone, the insurance industry would qualify as a criminal undertaking, but under capitalism, which normalizes oppression while making people's natural inclination to fight back against it the oddity, insurance is considered an honorable profession and industry.

It is within this scientific framework that we talk about State Farm Insurance. The Fortune 37 company (meaning they are the 37th largest company in the U.S. as it relates to business revenues) is utilized by many of you to insure your autos, houses, apartments, etc., but most of you probably may not be aware that State Farm is one of the primary backers of the heinous American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). ALEC is a legislative lobby group that has sponsored devastating legislation such as the infamous "Stand Your Ground" laws in states like Florida which led to weak @ss George Zimmerman being able to walk away from his cowardly killing of Trayvon Martin in 2012. ALEC has also sponsored multiple anti-LGBTQ bills across the U.S. as well as anti-women bills. They also have international tentacles, pushing legislation that has led to genetically modified foods becoming much more common place in Africa and the rest of the technologically "underdeveloped" world. All of this is said without even getting into ALEC's scandalous sponsoring of pro-prison legislation that has led the effort to dramatically swell the size of U.S. populations with primarily African and Indigenous peoples.

It goes without saying that the legislative system that ALEC operates in is corrupt and has never been built for marginalized communities anywhere, but the reason this is worth mentioning is we have to be wide awake to who we are spending our money with. We cannot get distracted because we may like the State Farm commercials staring basketball players like Chris Paul and Damian Lillard. And, most importantly, if we are focused on who these criminal corporations are, we can use that knowledge to strategize on how to hold them accountable for their support for the anti-human practices mentioned above. What if we organized an on the ground campaign that focused on State Farm for a year. We would encourage everyone to stop doing business with them during this time while maintaining a very public platform indicating the reasons why. In saying all of this, you have to remember that we are revolutionaries, so we have no illusions that this practice alone would sway a criminal corporation into changing their ways. Our objective would be much more strategic than that. Our plan would be to use the campaign to help people understand just how much the actual power is in their hands because I can assure you that if this campaign picked up steam, State Farm would be forced to respond with some concessions. The point would never be to accept those concessions. The point is that the fact that they have to do this would be used to educate people as to how just a little organization of the masses is enough to force these criminals to jump. The second objective would be to maintain a mass education campaign about the connections between State Farm and the oppressive mechanisms that make our lives a living hell because this information is important in order to ultimately convince people that these capitalist corporations will always be poison to us and that's why revolution is always going to be the only solution.

These are important initiatives because currently, most people believe the only method available to us to challenge any of this is in finding some way to utilize the capitalist system to introduce legislation to force State Farm, or whomever, to do something. The truth is, the sky's the limit to what we could do to take power from these criminals if we would just develop some unity of thought and action and get organized.

So, the next time you are watching CP3 and Damian Lillard on a State Farm commercial, or better yet, when you are sending them a payment, think about who they actually are. This should help you think about what capitalism really is. And then think about how we can get back at these beasts because we certainly can get back at them. We are the only people keeping us from doing that.

0 Comments

The Lies about Che Guevara from the White Left and Right

3/18/2017

1 Comment

The capitalist right wing is the primary architect of this carefully woven lie that Ernesto "Che" Guevara was some cold blooded killer, but there are many on the so-called "white left" who have also aided and abetted this reactionary narrative about a great revolutionary.

The basis of this lie is that Che supposedly ordered the murders of thousands of innocent people immediately after the victory of the Cuban revolution. Reactionary former Cubans (white people) in Florida, allied with the traditional capitalist right wing and liberal bourgeois, have fomented this lie in their consistent attempt to discredit the legitimacy of Guevara, Fidel Castro, Kwame Nkrumah, Sekou Ture, Kwame Ture, Mao Tse Tung, Nguyen Al Thoc (Ho Chi Minh), Huey P. Newton, Kim Il Sung, Robert Mugabe, Muammar Qaddafi, and countless legitimate revolutionaries. Their intentions and benefits should be obvious. By discrediting revolutionaries, they discredit revolution which keeps you and I firmly within their control. The so-called white left's eagerness to embrace these lies is unfortunately also not difficult to understand. And, to be clear, when we say white left, we mean anyone of any nationality who accepts the logic of white supremacy in evaluating the revolutionary processes carried out by revolutionaries of color or on behalf of brown folks. What I mean is in order to properly judge these revolutions in the correct historical context, these revolutions can only really be judged by one thing. Did they improve the conditions of the majority of people who these revolutions were designed and carried out to uplift? This question cannot be confused with whether the leaders of these revolutions were perfect and/or whether their revolutionary processes were without contradictions. We know that Sekou Ture was correct when he said "the only people who don't make mistakes are people who don't do anything." The so-called white anarchist communities are famous for being completely confused about this one. They have no appreciable body of work as it relates to eliminating capitalist oppression of brown people on any large and consistent level anywhere on earth, but that does nothing to stop them from striking out against every single perceived error by legitimate revolutionaries. What a wonderful set up. You can believe a so-called ideology that permits you to disconnect from humanity and use that cowardice as some sort of front for an ideological and programmatic thrust to confront oppression while supposedly freeing you up to criticize every effort anyone has made, sincere or not, to organize people into a productive and collective society that isn't based on capitalist principles and practices. Don't get it twisted. I'm not against anarchism. I'm just against you. There are plenty of legitimate and genuine anarchists who are doing good work. And because they are doing good work, they understand the sacrifices of these revolutionaries I'm mentioning and they certainly respect their contributions to eliminating oppression despite their mistakes. Then there are the brown folks who accept the lies because their vision of revolutions in the countries of their birth are so clouded by personal trauma that they unwittingly accept imperialism's version of history. And, I don't say that being insensitive to their suffering. My family came through the middle passage of slavery and segregation in the Southern U.S. so I'm certainly cognizant of that trauma, but if you are in the U.S. today as a Vietnamese person for example, since I'm a student of history, you are going to have to come to me much stronger than just you are against Ho Chi Minh because something happened to some of your family members while he was alive. We would have to talk about what your family was doing? Who they represented? Just because its your family doesn't mean they were on the right side of history. And it also doesn't mean that young and new revolutionary parties are not going to make errors. Serious errors. It would be great if every struggle could be carried out with perfection, but that's not reality and every true organizer knows that. To look at single incidents and use them to discredit a process that has clearly done significant things to improve conditions for millions of people is unscientific and an assist to imperialism's efforts to discredit revolutionary struggle whether that's the intention or not. So, to summarize this section, I'm not against revolutionary anarchism, I'm against bourgeois anarchism that is actually soaked in white supremacy. I'm also not immune to the cries, sometimes with merit, against the people who have critiques of the Cuban, Vietnamese, etc., revolutions. I'm questioning how they use what happened to their families, without any context and/or analysis, to discredit a revolution that impacts an entire population.

So, back to Che Guevara and what I mean by lies. I challenge anyone to demonstrate where Che had anything to do with any thousands of people dying in Cuba. In fact, I challenge anyone to show where Fidel or anyone else since the 1959 revolution had anything to do with any mass killing of this nature because despite what FOX, CBS, CIA, BBC, and all the other imperialist networks are pumping, there has never been any such thing in Cuba since the revolution. Cuba has one of the lowest state execution and imprisonment records in the world. So, when people call Che a mass murderer what they are referring to, in an alternative fact e.g. straight up lie sort of way - is the La Habana trials that took place in 1959/1960, immediately after the victory of the revolution. You have to realize that the people of Cuba, furious about the suffering they endured under the Batista regime, with the full support of the U.S. government, for years, wanted any and everyone even remotely connected to Batista to be murdered immediately. Actually, people were out hunting for these people and whomever they found was subjected to street justice. To prevent this from continuing, the new revolutionary Cuban government dispatched Che, who was newly appointed as the Minister of the Interior, to the La Habana stadium to oversee hundreds of trials for these people. Note that his roll was to oversee the trials which were actually administered by the people involved in the legal processes of revolutionary Cuba. So in truth, he didn't order the execution of anybody. And, if you study the history, as I have, you would know that every international monitoring agency reported that had Che not served in that roll, hundreds more people who were innocent would have been killed. Instead, the reports are that at most, a couple of hundred of people may have been tried and executed unduly through this process, but again, with the fervor of the time, this should be viewed as a positive by the government and not a strike against it. Especially since the government acknowledged their errors in every instance that they were able to confirm them and they compensated the families to the best of their ability. So, to ignore all of the true history around La Habana while labeling Che with this killer mantle is historically criminal. If you objectively evaluate Che's role in La Habana, his role as a military commander in the Cuban revolution, the Congolese mission in 1964, Bolivia in 1966 and 1967, and the role he played in establishing Cuba's military presence in Africa, this man unquestionably saved millions of lives. He placed his body in harms way to defend people, brown people, and he ultimately lost his life doing just that while his critics haven't risked a hang nail or a pimple for any brown people anywhere.

So, this is why millions of people turned out in 1997 when the Bolivian government was finally pressured into returning Che's remains to Cuba, 30 years after they brutally murdered him. Its also why several million Cuban's marched and expressed their extreme sorrow at the loss of Fidel Castro just a few months ago, but who are we, the people at the very bottom of capitalism's oppression, to question the unshakable correctness of the white left and right? Of course we expect nothing different from the right wing, but to you so-called revolutionaries who purport this nonsense, with friends like you we don't need enemies. All you do is revise a saying an old comrade said in the 80s: "Left or right, still white!"

The haters won't listen because they never do, but to everyone else, this should hopefully help you understand why the masses of oppressed people, who are not stupid, love Che and Fidel. And nothing the white left says or does will ever change that. And for those who would read this and call me racist, please make note that Che was without question a White man. And, I'm unquestionably defending him. Oh, and Fidel was White too by the way, but unlike some of you, we love and respect people based on what they have done, not who they are or how we subjectively perceive them.

1 Comment

Using the Term African as Our Identity is Political, Not Biological

3/17/2017

0 Comments

I started using the term African for self-identification when I was 17. That was 37 years ago which means I've been calling myself African for 69% of my time on this earth compared to the 31% of my life I called myself every derogatory name designated for our people that I had available to me. I "legally" changed my name, meaning I went through the capitalist system's process of changing my entire identification to my African name when I was 22 which means I've had my African name 59% of life compared to 41% of my life without it. So clearly, I've had plenty of time to think quite deeply about this identity question. That's almost 40 years of engaging in just the simple exercise of introducing myself to people. Just like you, for that long stretch of time, I've introduced myself to quite a few people. Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? This experience has given me a very large sampling of data to assess this identity question. For years and years I've heard the same things over and over. "John?" I got that today from someone I introduced myself to. Although I can't for the life of me understand how anyone could possibly hear John phonetically when I say Ahjamu, today, for the 10,000th time, it happened. I say phonetically because the only way John turns into Ahjamu is not because of a phonetic issue, but a political one. White supremacy, the primary appendage of capitalism, has remote control programmed everyone in the world to see European culture as the primary and only legitimate lenses from which to view the world. That's why when I say Ahjamu - a clear African name - no matter how well I articulate it, people hear the European John in response. You can use this same example for everything in this capitalist society. Everything we say and do is seen through European capitalist lenses. This is the reason why my decision, our decision, to call ourselves African is overwhelmingly a political identity and not a biological one.

When we say Africans we are not making any type of statement about our ancestry, although that is how most people incorrectly interpret it. Since the capitalist definition of anthropology and biology has trained us that our ancestry is a question in biology and geography, when we say African, people incorrectly assume they can make an assessment of our claim through a racial and geographical point of view. That's why people have always responded, and continue to respond to us by telling us that since we were born in the U.S., at best, we can be African Americans, but we cannot be Africans. We always tell them what Malcolm said. He responded that "when a cat has kittens in an oven, they aren't called biscuits!" Malcolm's point is the cat has specific designations that define its existence and those designations are not eliminated based simply on where the cat happens to be produced. This is equally true for us as human beings. We are not of African "descent." We are of African ascent which means the relevance of Africa isn't that its where we came from, its that Africa is where we are going. In other words, the future of African people everywhere is intrinsically linked to the future of Africa. That's why we call ourselves African and that's why this decision is motivated and defined by political, and not biological and/or geographical considerations.

Its also why our intent in calling ourselves African is to connect ourselves to our national homeland. That same homeland that produces all of the natural resources and much of the cheap labor that fuels and finances the continued economic dominance of capitalism. Our desire is to end that exploitation of Africa and to use those vast mineral resources to serve the needs of Africa, her children, and all of humanity. So, since we understand this task and we have taken on the mission of fulfilling it, we start by making the natural and historically correct act of connecting ourselves to our mother - Africa. Without question this is a political act and since it is political, what we call Africa is inconsequential. So, for all you Kemitics or whomever who want to spend all day arguing that Africa is the name of a European, we respond to this silliness by telling you that you can call Africa Party People Land if it suits you. That would just make us Party People Land People.

So the next time you say African and someone corrects you by saying "African American." The next time you connect yourself in any way to Africa and people start immediately attempting to convince you that your only possible option is to connect to the U.S. The next time someone makes an attempt to divide Africans who are born in different countries. All of these things are manifestations of the remote control brain dirtying effort to confuse us away from making those political connections to our national homeland. You see, capitalism needs Africa, not the other way around. And, the U.S. needs Africans, not the other way around. And although everyone tries their absolute best to pretend that what I'm writing about here lacks any logic, my logic does explain why whenever I wear something that says "African" there are always people, mostly Europeans, who make it a point to ask me why. While you are out and about this weekend with people who are wearing Ireland all over themselves with absolutely no one asking why, ask yourself about that.

0 Comments

We Ain't Liberals, Nor are we your Stalinists

3/11/2017

0 Comments

The glorious European (White) left has contributed so much to humanity's forward progress. I say that in jest, but in truth, the White left has made some sincere contributions. Nothing anywhere near the level that they wish to convince us they have made, but they have made some. Marxist/Leninist thought and practice has made unquestionable contributions to the class struggle in European and even other parts of the world, particularly as it relates to providing a pole for people who wish to challenge the hegemony of capitalism to rally around. Although major problems result from it, Marxist/Leninist parties led and continue to lead the revolutions in Cuba, Vietnam, and even China. In an attempt to leap frog above the problems, the Cuban revolution has evolved beyond the "strict" Marxist/Leninist line over the years, adopting a tolerance (at first) and then a respect and support for Cuba's strong African cultural experience, including the African spiritual elements that the revolution now realizes can help cement the revolution instead of taking away from it.

So, there are some positives that the white left has contributed, but our issue is the definition of socialist thought and practice today is viewed exclusively through the eyes of Europe as if no other people on earth are capable of developing our own ideology and practice that isn't dominated by Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin, and anyone else White. We have always contended, upon deaf ears, that we study and include the ideas of the White left whenever appropriate to our unique cultural experiences as African people attempting to implement socialist revolution, but we will never be confused enough to permit European ideologies to serve as our guiding light(s). That honor will forever go to our own African revolutionary African personality, or as Amilcar Cabral stated correctly "ideology cannot be imported." As a result, we cannot qualify as Stalinists because our cultural experience is completely different than that which drove the ideas and actions behind the Bolshevik uprising in Russia in 1917. Yes, we do employ some of their tactics, like democratic centralism, but anyone who truly understands democratic centralism (and I find very, very, few who do) knows that if implemented correctly, it is the most democratic process one can imagine. I know this first hand after spending hours upon hours "struggling" as we affectionately call it over ideas within my Pan-Africanist political party. There has been way to much debate that I have participated in directly to let anyone tell me democratic centralism isn't democratic. If anything, I often feel that we give too much of a voice to people who haven't earned the right - through concrete work - to take up nearly as much space as they do, but that isn't the point. The point is by giving them that space, we hope to convince them of the integrity of our process so that they can be moved to dedicating putting in that time. I understand and respect that theory. And we certainly practice it. We also practice building mass political parties which does a lot to eliminate much of the problems that critics of Stalinism raise. For us, since we are not going to people's meetings and secretly attempting to gain control of their political agenda in order to manipulate it towards our objectives, we cannot be accused of carrying out that type of political domination. When we come in the room, we are telling you up front that we are revolutionary Pan--Africanists who's objective is one unified socialist Africa. We make it crystal clear that we are 100% opposed to the capitalist system so if you want to roll with us, you either accept that or you don't, but you can never claim we tried to fool you. So, we don't play those anti-democratic games because we are trying to recruit everyone e.g. mass party building. We aren't just trying to have a few people control our work so the manipulation isn't necessary in our honest and transparent approach. And, despite the lies of imperialism to try and throw shade on the government's of Kwame Nkrumah and Sekou Ture, we have written exhaustively and extensively in ways that clearly invalidate those backward and unprincipled attempts to discredit our self-determination, so don't justify your liberalism and racism by labeling us Stalinists. It won't work. We are not Stalinists. We are not Marxist/Leninists. We are Nkrumahist/Tureists and proud to be so.

By the same token, stop calling us liberals. If people understand the true definition of the word liberal, it has nothing to do with the bourgeois concept of "conservative and liberal thought" as if such confusion could actually exist. Clearly, all thought is dialectical, meaning it is nuanced and includes all elements at the same time. Consequently, that bourgeois definition lacks scientific basis. Instead, we take it back to the classic definition of liberalism which means the unwillingness to challenge core issues of conflict, preferring instead to focus on surface and insignificant issues to avoid being faced with the true contradictions. So, if people understand that classic definition, we are always going to be the last people who could ever be accused to being liberals because we are confronting the core issues in this society better than anyone. The problem here is the bourgeois system has convinced so many people that there is no analysis outside of its parameters. That there is absolutely and resolutely, no way to critique the existence of capitalism without including a solution that involves capitalism. Therefore, the bourgeois capitalist system consistently promotes this backward concept that the only critique of capitalism is that of figuring out how to fix it. Since this is an outstanding example of avoiding the true issue - which is that capitalism itself is the problem that must be destroyed - everyone who raises a voice against this system of oppression is automatically lumped inside of the capitalist system as a liberal e.g. someone who is complaining about the system while simply wishing to improve it.

We have absolutely no interest in rescuing capitalism. We want to pour oil on the fire and help it burn to death. We agree wholeheartedly with El Hajj Malik El Shabazz (Malcolm X) when he correctly stated "I'm not a politician...I'm not a student of politics. I'm neither a republican, nor a democrat, nor an american, and got sense enough to know it!" So, understanding that ill-refutable definition of how to classify our revolutionary personality and position, how absurd and silly it is to lump us in with those who wish only to revise the oppression meted out by the capitalist system. We are not in the Democratic Party (nor the Republican Party). We seek to destroy both of them and all capitalist political parties.

We reject the efforts to label us liberals and Stalinists in all forms that they are presented to us, but we realize that those who make them will continue to do so. That's why we aren't writing this for those opportunists. We are writing this for those of you who may be confused by the constant barrage of backward analysis that pretends to serve as honest dialogue around these issues. We are revolutionaries. Revolutionary Pan-Africanists. We are not concerned with a fool in the white house. We don't care whether they are an orange idiot fool or a articulate African fool. We aren't concerned. We are only concerned - as Kwame Ture stated over and over again - with the power of the organized masses. And we stand ready to engage in serious dialogue around how to build towards that objective whenever people are ready to move forward.

We realize there is quite a bit of work required to make this happen. I'm ready to help you on a individual to make the changes necessary to be ready to engage this work. Click on the personal advising tab to find out more.

0 Comments

"Get Out" the Movie. Through A Revolutionary Pan African Lense

3/4/2017

1 Comment

I decided to write this after seeing the movie a second time this morning. A lot of people are talking about this movie in a lot of different ways so I wanted to take a second look before commenting. I've read people who have said the movie was "the best commentary on racism to come out of Hollywood." There are sentiments about the evils of European (White) women, racist micro-aggression, etc. As usual, what is missing in all of these perspectives is the nation, class, gender, analysis that I am so thankful I have been given by our Nkrumahmist/Tureist ideology of the All African People's Revolutionary Party. You see, we view everything through our revolutionary cultural lenses. The lenses of the masses of African people. And, I am convinced that without that perspective, any interpretation by us, about us, or for us, about our conditions within the capitalist system will be badly skewed and dysfunctional at best and outright dangerous at worse.

I thought the movie had good entertainment value. And, because it has that, the emotional responses it will generate can be miss-interpreted by many well meaning people as a sign of quality when in fact, its simply what we are seeing through those emotional lenses. Certainly, there is much about this capitalist/white supremacist society that is exposed in the movie, but because this society is built and maintained on the dehumanization and subjugation of African people, this is no outstanding achievement and to suggest so is akin to suggesting that a movie that highlights the practice of breathing oxygen is a ground breaking phenomenon. I think that as oppressed people, and folks who hopefully side with oppressed people, we have to learn to view everything through our own cultural perspective because doing so will reveal much that is hidden to the naked and untrained eye.

For example, I think it does a great disservice to African people to have a character experience such disrespectful behavior by White people towards us without having the African make even the slightest effort to challenge the reactionary comments and behaviors that are made against him constantly throughout the movie. Franz Fanon wrote in his classic books "The Wretched of the Earth" and especially "Black Skin, White Masks" that African people will never achieve our full liberation until we challenge the day to day oppressive behaviors that are directed against us. So, yes, I get that the African kills the evil white people in the movie, but after the dehumanizing effort that he himself seemingly accepted throughout the first two thirds of the film, the killings seemed almost as an after thought since I know the emotional and psychological damage of being mentally beat down by white supremacy had already been established and institutionalized throughout the movie. The killings then seemed to have about as much impact as killing one or two police officers in response to systemic and state sanctioned murder against African people. Too little, too late, with the subtle message that he can kill those four people, but the system they represented still reigns on. Plus, his sickening and uncompromising support for his girlfriend's ignorant and manipulative behavior as a reaction to his very real experiences further cemented the perpetuation of the belief that how white people see things is what's most important, despite whatever trauma we are forced to experience. And this is on top of the inconsistency of his girlfriend's behavior. First, she is completely clueless about why telling her parents about having an African boyfriend would be a thing, then she emerges as the most conscious and uncompromising "Know your Rights" activist you have ever seen when confronted with the police's interaction with her African boyfriend. And that scene is handled as if what she did actually amounted to a heroic act when in reality, her actions should symbolize white woman arrogance. The same type of arrogance that has gotten thousands of African men killed. During this movie sequence we are forced to stomach the sickening concept of another white person saving us from police terrorism while the African acts like someone with no agency and a complete willingness to accommodate being oppressed by the system. It is impossible for me to see the groundbreaking critique of white supremacy in any of this. Instead, I see the same old subtle message that we still don't matter and that our purpose in life is to be oppressed and to serve as fodder for the day to day trivial pursuits of ignorant white people.

Finally, it was interesting to me that in each movie screening I attended, the participants cheered loudest when the white girlfriend is killed. Granted, she is the reason the African was subjected to the traumatic experience and I understand fully that there is a lot of anger against white women, some of it very justified, by many segments of the oppressed communities, but I believe there is also something else happening here. Even how that women's character is portrayed in the movie reflects a sort of contempt for women. It is impossible to relate to her and I don't think that is an accident. It think it subconsciously feeds into the wide spread belief that no women, not just white women, can be trusted and that whatever violence befalls women is somehow, someway, justified, no matter what they do, or don't do. With women being historically and systemically oppressed and dehumanized as policy under capitalism and feudalism and slavery before that (so for the last several thousands of years), you cannot convince me that these subtle anti-women elements aren't flowing throughout the narrative of these interactions. And, all of this reflects the contradictions of capitalism which is based on pitting all working people against one another by baiting and switching on a regular basis. What this means is the white woman is portrayed as a manipulative and exploitative promoting creative while at the same time using all of the usual tricks to dehumanize her. This is all happening during this movie while the chief contradiction, the class contradiction of the rich Europeans and how they have the resources and systems to maintain such a brutal system of repression without fear of being caught, convicted, and imprisoned (because of their insulation by being rich and white) is practically unexplored beyond a few comments. That was the significance to me of the father saying to the African boyfriend that the property was completely private. They can do whatever they want. A clear reference, whether intended or not, to the class privileges petti-bourgeois Europeans contain as a result of their class position on top of our oppression. This is the real problem, not just the general and generic concept of the white woman in interracial relationships.

Overall, I think the movie did much more perpetuation of age old stereotypes - like our need to provide willing compliance with our oppression - than anything else. It was entertaining, but like all popular culture in this backward society, its primary purpose is to provide that entertainment, not educate. And with the constant and uncompromising propaganda mechanism that is the capitalist system in this society, entertainment is defined by continuing the same programming that the fact this society was built on exploiting Africans and Africa, is really not a real problem, and that all of us need to just accept that and continue on with our day.

1 Comment

Today, its Medase (Thank you) and Reflection from Me

3/1/2017

1 Comment

After spending 10 years in one state in the U.S., I find myself traveling back to the state I spent all of my previous years on earth. The decision is all about the work I want to do, who I want to do it with, and the environment I want to do it in for the few remaining years I plan to stay in this country before transitioning home to Africa. As I prepared to leave, I tried to do what I could to avoid my departure being an issue. Not because I have some false modesty or fake humility, but because its all genuinely embarrassing for me. The U.S., all of it, is a slave plantation for African people in my mind. So, just like I cannot envision my ancestors celebrating moving from one plantation to another, I honestly cannot see celebrating my movement any differently. When, I move to Africa, that will be a celebration!

Still, I am writing this because I have been moved beyond words for the level of sincerity so many people took to express their appreciation for my work. I've had truly wonderful people dedicate songs to me. My A-APRP comrades here started a wonderful chain of statements of thanks for my influences into their lives and one of them even used their platform as M/C as a huge event we hosted last week to speak about my personal impact on them. At a luncheon of about 20 work colleagues yesterday, I was given a card with a collection of traveling expense money and one employee wrote and read an impromptu poem in my honor in front of the entire restaurant. A good friend and a great local journalist wrote a wonderful article about my leaving. There have been a lot of tears from grown folks, mine leading the charge. I have received so many emails, text messages, phone calls, and Face Book statements of love and well wishes that I cannot count and/or respond to them all. The reoccurring theme in all of this that stands out to me is the extent to which people are expressing their appreciation of a mentoring role I played in their personal development. People have repeatedly used words like integrity, courage, and commitment. I've also heard very personal testimonies from people I had no idea I was having such an impact on which reinforces why its important to believe in everyone because like Marcus Garvey said, we have no way of knowing what impact we will have on others. The entire scenario deeply humbles me and makes me feel like I need to continue to work harder to earn the accolades people have been bestowing upon me.

Of course, the true deep-seated emotions I'm fighting are those so hard to overcome feelings that these people are really talking about someone else and not me. That it must be someone else because clearly, if they knew me and all my imperfections, they wouldn't see me in the visions they are talking about. These are the demons that regularly haunt my existence, and yours as well. And the reasons I'm talking about them isn't to draw your attention there and certainly not to attempt to generate any sympathy on my behalf. The reasons I'm talking about this is because I know that all of us are besieged with these types of negative feelings because this backward system breeds that within us. My hope is by talking honestly about it, it can hopefully help others who probably believe they are the only ones battling these dysfunctions.

I spend an awful lot of time challenging my demons with pre-designed and positive self talk. I've found that the more I do it, the more it works. I've been doing it for years and now I've trained myself to almost automatically respond with positive self talk to any negative thoughts that creep into my head. What I'm telling myself today is that I need to use these few days to truly enjoy the love I'm receiving and to reflect on what I've done to generate it so I can continue to feed that reserve. I'm telling myself to nourish on the warmth these sentiments provide for me in a way that's eerily symbolic of the warmth I'll experience from moving from cold Oregon to much warmer California.

I really want to thank all of you for your expressions of love. I appreciate you equally. I'll promise to keep doing whatever I can to try and help us move forward. And, I'll also promise to keep in touch, really. At this stage in my life, I realize all we really have is our human relationships so I'm focused on maintaining the ones that I have. I encourage you to keep banging. The more we fight the enemies of humanity, the more we claim our legitimate humanity. Thank you for helping me wage my battle and if in doing so, I've helped you in a similar way, its only fitting in my book.

1 Comment

State Farm Insurance: How Capitalism Makes Criminals Legal

The Lies about Che Guevara from the White Left and Right

Using the Term African as Our Identity is Political, Not Biological

We Ain't Liberals, Nor are we your Stalinists

"Get Out" the Movie. Through A Revolutionary Pan African Lense

Today, its Medase (Thank you) and Reflection from Me

Author

Archives

Categories

State Farm Insurance: How Capitalism Makes Criminals Legal

The Lies about Che Guevara from the White Left and Right

﻿Using the Term African as Our Identity is Political, Not Biological

We Ain't Liberals, Nor are we your Stalinists

"Get Out" the Movie. Through A Revolutionary Pan African Lense

Today, its Medase (Thank you) and Reflection from Me

Author

Archives

Categories

Using the Term African as Our Identity is Political, Not Biological