Blog Archives

"Memorial Day" Another Dishonest Play for Emotion Extortion

5/30/2021

Every year, the U.S. government, backed 100% by the multi-national capitalist corporations that lead it, uses propaganda days to justify and normalize U.S. imperialism and exploitation. The spring/summer months have two of the largest in Memorial Day and their Fourth of July. We will say more about the Fourth of the Lie as it gets closer, but for this weekend, its this so-called “Memorial Day.” The premise of this day is that we all should pay respects to those who fought in the U.S. military and lost their lives. The capitalist system promotes the day as some sort of day of mourning. As an example, over the last few days, thousands of people on Twitter are criticizing bourgeoisie spokesperson Kamala Harris because she made a Memorial Day tweet about enjoying the weekend without paying homage to the imperialist definition of the day.

Since Harris is a primary spokesperson for U.S. imperialism, we are sure her statement was never meant to disparage imperialism. In fact, she was probably just operating within the selfish individualist mindset that most people in this society live by. That’s why Memorial Day is so absurd because most people, beyond empty rhetoric, have absolutely no concern for any of the U.S. troops who have died in battle. Part of that is because, as stated, people in this country are socialized to see very little beyond their noses and to interpret and value everything based solely on how it benefits them on an individual basis. In other words, what most people here actually mean when they say “respect Memorial Day” is they wish to maintain their privileged and comfortable lives and if that takes millions of U.S. troops being maimed and killed, than so be it. And, don’t expect any of them to spend five seconds even looking at these “veterans” stationed along any city offramp in this country.

And this perspective must be understood within the context of the contradictions within this capitalist system. We would argue that people don’t think beyond themselves because the very essence of this so-called “holiday” is based completely on lies and misinformation. No U.S. war has ever been fought for any reason other than to develop, maintain, and sustain the dominance of multi-national corporate capitalism. Despite the propaganda, none of these wars has accomplished a single thing to establish stability for a single person within the U.S. and this certainly has not happened within any of the countries where these wars have taken place. Afghanistan, Iraq, Grenada, Somalia, Kosovo, Libya, etc. None of these countries are better based upon U.S. imperialist efforts. Instead, all of those countries are in much worse condition in every measurable category as a result of imperialist hegemony. And, as for people within the U.S., the continued decline of capitalism has never been so easy to see as it is now with the effects of the pandemic over the last year or so. Meanwhile, U.S. military veterans commit suicide at a rate of 25 per day.

The truth about all of this is that Memorial Day, the Fourth of the Lie, thankstaking, all of these propaganda days for capitalism each serve one purpose and one purpose only. Tools to convince you and me that we possess some exceptional protection from God. We are on the right side of history and the military elements from this country are God’s troops against the devil, so therefore, we have a responsibility to pay our respects to not only the military, but really the criminal values and objectives of the capitalists who lead this country.

And those capitalists have gone to great lengths to imbue institutions to promote their values. Millions are spent by the U.S. government, through the military, to ensure professional sporting events, high schools, job faires, colleges, etc., are soaked with respect for U.S. military/imperialism. This process is so institutionalized that most people don’t even recognize this blatant effort to politicize these events/institutions with imperialist propaganda. They only recognize the people who resist it, like Colin Kaepernick or those brave souls who protest military recruitment on high school and college campuses. People accuse these activists of politicizing everything when it was the capitalists who started that process a long time ago.

You will get no respect for Memorial Day here. You will get wishes of recovery and good will towards those who fought in those backward wars. Those people were duped into believing they were doing something worthwhile and regardless of that, most of them are only there in the first place due to economic opportunities that do not exist for them otherwise. This is extortion. Forcing people to do your violent bidding at the hope of being able to feed their families. Disgraceful, when in reality the U.S. military is nothing except a mercenary force designed to serve the violent interests of a soulless empire whose only concern is its continued dominance of the world at any cost.

Still, many more so-called veterans of U.S. military “service” need to join their comrades in exposing the contradictions of the U.S. military. Too many of them, in an effort to justify risking their lives for nothing, losing friends, and losing much themselves, continue to uphold this imperialist myth because it brings them some dysfunctional comfort on a personal level.

Instead of worshiping mercenaries and their missions, we would do well to study the consciousness of people within the Cuban revolution who reserve their hero worship for those thousands of selfless persons in Cuba who volunteer for medical service throughout poor countries in the world in Africa, Asia, etc. Celebrating people who make the world better instead of contributing to further destruction in the world. An amazing concept.

Another fake “Memorial Day” will come and go, but in another 30 days we will be forced to stomach imperialism’s biggest propaganda effort – July 4th. It never stops and it cannot stop because everyone knows that the only way you can sustain the dominance of a lie is to keep it going and never let up.

0 Comments

Why Black Power/Unity Fully Realized Equals Pan-Africanism

5/24/2021

0 Comments

May 25th each year is officially designated as African Liberation Day (ALD). Within the All African People’s Revolutionary Party (A-APRP), we use ALD simply as an institution to organize our people around the concepts of Pan-Africanism i.e. the total liberation and unification of Africa under scientific socialism being the solution to the problems African people face today in 120 countries worldwide.

In 1989, Kwame Ture (Stokley Carmichael) participated in a panel discussion on the McNeal-Lehrer news show on the Public Broadcasting System. The purpose of the panel was to bring together different voices within the African community within the U.S. to talk about the then growing usage of the label “African-American” to signify Africans or people of African descent born and living within the U.S. Of course, Brother Ture was a major figure in the civil disobedience direct action period of the civil rights movement of the early to mid 60s, and the Black power movement in the latter 60s. Ture was the person who first publicly articulated the “Black power” theme during the civil rights “March against Fear” that was carried out in June of 1966. The last major civil rights march, this particular one brought with it a strategy by the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) of which Ture was the chairperson. After engaging in the rigorous and failed campaign to properly integrate within the Mississippi, U.S. Democratic Party through the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (a SNCC project) in 1964, and the independent Lowndes County Freedom Organization in Alabama the next year, Ture and SNCC had moved significantly away from the non-violent civil disobedience philosophy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. By 1966, SNCC was heavily influenced by the African nationalist philosophy of Malcolm X. As a result, SNCC decided to challenge King’s organization’s march theme of “Freedom Now” which King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) had contributed to the march when the civil rights groups took it over after James Meredith was shot by a white racist. “Freedom Now” had been the standard theme for all the civil rights marches and SNCC, wanting to infuse more militancy and self-determination into the consciousness of the African masses, wanted to replace “Freedom Now” with “Black Power!” During some of the most dangerous and tense points of that march, Ture – at the urging of Mukassa Dada (Willie Ricks) who had organized around the “Black Power” theme at march stops ahead of the march – shouted the new slogan to hundreds of angry African youth who had just been terrorized once again by racist police and local people. This action galvanized the African masses nationwide and worldwide and Black Power became a rallying cry and movement for the next several years.

As a result of his position within that social development, Ture was asked during the television panel discussion whether he would adopt the term “African-American” or stay with the term “Black” which he was so instrumental in popularizing during the 60s. Ture responded that human consciousness moves at all times. He explained that during the 60s, we believed our primary struggle was one against white racism so in response to that, we asserted “Black is beautiful” and “Black Power.” Ture continued that as our understanding grew, we learned that our struggle isn’t just a struggle against white racism. It’s a struggle for power against the oppressive system (capitalism) which was built upon and sustained from our exploitation. As a result, Ture said that the power we need comes from controlling land and the land we have a right to is Africa so the correct term for us to identify ourselves is African.

It is that same logic that clarifies why Pan-Africanism is a much higher expression of our dignity and desire to be free and independent than Black Power. The term Black Power or Black unity is great, but lacking in substance as it relates to addressing core contradictions our people face. Our reality is that we know absolutely nothing about someone just based upon them being Black. As a result, someone can claim Blackness and be completely against the interests of the masses of our people. An example is a popular phrase being widely used today that says “I’m rooting for everyone Black!” This comment, well intentioned as it is, lacks class analysis and scientific reasoning. To say such a thing means you root for people like Mobutu or William O’Neal, or Barack Obama or Clarence Thomas since the only qualification is containing “Black” biological components (the inference being that having that component brings certain qualities with it – an assumption that is easily proven untrue). Of course, there are people somewhere who have taken the time to develop much deeper criteria for when they use the term “Black Power”, but for most people, and certainly the way its been practiced, it has no meaning beyond physical appearance. No connection to values, principles, and actions.

On the other hand, when we say revolutionary Pan-Africanism we are talking about an objective that contains certain ill-refutable principles. One is that Africa is our mother and rallying around and uniting around her liberation is at the core of our focus. And, by liberation, we automatically mean that capitalism and imperialism, the systems that have exploited Africa for 500+ years, must be destroyed and replaced by scientific socialism. It also means that by African, we mean a primarily political definition, not just a biological one. In other words, being an African requires a commitment to principles of justice and collective existence, not just what you look like (understanding that the only way to demonstrate your quality as a human is by what you do, not where you come from. In fact, what you do defines who you are i.e. African being a primarily political biological definition). With that understanding, Pan-Africanism comes with certain requirements that include an emphasis on mass and collective organization, not just the placement of individuals into visible positions and the suggestion that doing that alone equals progress (the capitalist way to providing symbols of progress to avoid the real thing). Pan-Africanism also includes an understanding that we do not struggle in isolation. The humanist principles of our Nkrumahist/Tureist ideology that drives our Pan-Africanist work prohibits any xenophobic confusion. As a result, we recognize and respect the fact that all non-African people fighting for justice are fighting against the same forces of oppression that we are. This doesn’t mean that we depend upon anyone except ourselves. Only the African masses can free Africa, but we do understand that victory for the Palestinians, Indigenous people’s of the Western Hemisphere, Irish, etc., does nothing except weaken the same enemies we are fighting against. Plus, our humanist African culture requires us to recognize everyone’s cries for justice, not just our own.

We cannot accept capitalism in blackface in 2021 and beyond as more tricknology to fool our people into false promises of forward progress. We cannot continue to act as if someone’s appearance qualifies them as trusted representatives of our people. Instead, we have to build mass movements that build collective leadership based on principles of justice, not individual leaders based on idealistic and symbolic imagery. So, revolutionary Pan-Africanism is without question, the highest expression of Black Power because it provides all of the elements we want from Black Power i.e. pride in our history and culture. While, it also gives us the scientific and humanist skills and vision to link up with our people everywhere on earth and with all of oppressed humanity. Participate in African Liberation Day 2021 and every year in May. African Liberation Day is the highest expression of Pan-Africanism and all of the wonderful principles we discuss in this piece.

0 Comments

Eldridge Cleaver, the Black Panther Party & African Liberation Day

5/10/2021

1 Comment

“a“Revolutionary or Death” is the 2020 biography written about former Black Panther Party (BPP) Minister of Information Leroy “Eldridge” Cleaver. The book was written by Justin Clifford. Eldridge Cleaver without question was an enigmatic figure within the BPP and Clifford attempts to use this biography to show a balanced view of Cleaver as insightful and talented while also displaying Cleaver’s brutality and ruthlessness.
Most people engaged in studying the history of African liberation movements in general and the BPP in particular already have some understanding of the contradictions within the BPP. Eldridge personified those contradictions. On the positive side, his open willingness to use the royalties from his best-selling book “Soul on Ice” to help finance the early stages of the BPP, and his work to establish the Los Angeles BPP Branch (the first outside of Oakland, California, U.S.), are clear examples here. It was Eldridge who recruited Alprentice “Bunchy” Carter into the BPP after their days doing time together at Folsom Prison in California during the 1960s. Carter, along with Fred Hampton, probably remain as the most iconic and respected BPP leaders to this day. Also, Cleaver’s work, along with people like Kwame Ture (Stokely Carmichael) and others to make the Panthers a national organization cannot be overstated.
On the dysfunctional side, Cleaver’s admitted focus on using rape as a method of controlling women is obviously disgraceful. And, along with that behavior was Cleaver’s consistent physical brutality against women, especially his longtime wife Kathleen Cleaver. And, then there’s Cleaver’s constant sexual manipulation and exploitation of women. And, his selfish and narcissistic behavior in this regard is also represented by his adventuristic and ideologically underdeveloped understanding of revolutionary theory and practice. It was his lack of understanding in this area that led to multiple people being killed, including Lil Bobby Hutton. Also, Cleaver’s underdeveloped political consciousness led the Panthers into an unsustainable position of confrontation against the U.S. government with nothing close to the capacity to engage that position. Then finally, there was Cleaver’s talent for creating and implementing the political personality that would best serve his individual interests. From being a model inmate in prison to becoming a member and eventual prison leader for the Nation of Islam. Then becoming a Marxist/Leninist and one of the primary voices for the BPP. Then he became first a born again right wing Christian before becoming a member of the Unification Church (Moonies). Then, he became a Mormon, and provocative clothes designer before reclaiming some of his radical left ideas during the last period of his life. Cleaver seemed to use identity the way most people use fashion, to represent the flavor of the day that works best for that day’s objective.
The contradictions related to Cleaver’s seemingly chameleon life created a broader question about the Black Panther Party itself. Due to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) counter-intelligence inspired beef between Cleaver and BPP co-founder Huey P. Newton, most people tend to view the two of them as opposites. The truth is much more complex, and that truth further defines the strengths and weaknesses within the BPP itself. Like Cleaver, Newton made major contributions to the BPP and the African liberation struggle in general. His vision in creating the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense provided the blueprint that current organizations like Black Lives Matter still borrow heavily from. And, his individual courage in being willing to publicly confront armed police in the name of justice provided a role model that people all over the world grew and benefited from. I remember being 13 years old and stealing a copy of a Playboy magazine that my father’s friend provided to him when my father was hospitalized. After staring at the naked pictures, I stumbled upon an article in the magazine, and it was the picture for the article that captured my imagination. It was Newton in the rattan chair with the African spear and shotgun, outfitted as a Panther, staring uncompromisingly ahead. I also recall the title of that article. It was “Why Blacks Aren’t Scary Anymore.” Today, I understand clearly that capitalism has always promoted the narrative that our people were scared to stand up for ourselves (and unfortunately, most of us don’t study our history enough to realize how untrue this is), but there is no question that Newton’s vision and practice made a major contribution to increasing the militancy in not only our movements, but in our communities all over the world.
Also like Cleaver, Newton had a history of brutality and ruthlessness to all genders of people. And, also like Cleaver, Newton’s abuse of drugs brought out more of his dysfunctional behavior at the expense of all those who suffered because they looked to Newton (and Cleaver) for principled leadership.
The reality of these contradictions with Cleaver and Newton reflects the broader contradictions that plague us as a people, and society as a whole. What these situations demonstrate is that we cannot expect to rely on individuals, regardless of how charismatic and intelligent, to “lead” our struggle because all of us are works in progress. Maybe not to the extremes mentioned here, but all of us have positives and negatives. Yet, all of us have unlimited potential to make much needed and necessary contributions. Still, the history of the BPP, Newton, Cleaver, etc., shows us that individual leadership is not the answer. The word cadre is used often today, but most people using it cannot demonstrate any true understanding of its meaning. Unlike its popular usage, the term isn’t inseparable from European communist parties. It doesn’t mean people who occupy privileged decision-making positions. Instead, it simply means persons who personify the principles and practices of revolutionary life through what they do on a consistent basis. By principles, we mean valuing humanity over all else and practicing patience, selflessness, and consistency with the people regardless of any and all obstacles that get in the way.
The development of collective cadre can only happen within a collective revolutionary process. That cannot mean haphazard discussions. It cannot mean intense intellectual study accompanied by nothing else. It can only mean mass processes where study and the tools of collective development i.e. criticism/self-criticism and democratic centralism, are utilized and institutionalized on an systemic basis.
Clearly, all of us deserve some of the blame for the behaviors of Cleaver, Newton and others because we did not build in processes to challenge their behaviors and hold them accountable. Instead, we built up these individual leaders as being larger than life and therefore incapable of being criticized. Examples of this are Cleaver’s erratic and dictatorial behavior in carrying out the ill-advised shootout against Oakland police two days after Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated (where Lil Bobby Hutton was killed). His dictatorial and abusive behavior while representing the BPP in Cuba and then Algeria, and North Korea. And, Newton’s abuse of power throughout the 70s which not only got people killed, but also contributed to numerous Panthers being incarcerated for long periods of time. These examples are still relevant today because we continue to make the same errors. Even in 2021, too many of us are still swayed by the symbolism of organization and power to which the BPP represented clearly during the 1960s. Just like we glorified the black leather jackets, black berets, and guns in the 60s, we still romanticize African people with guns and mouths that fire more inaccurately than the guns they carry. And, this is still a problem for us simply because most of us have never been involved in any actual organization of our people against injustice because if we were, we would be able to see the clear difference between real power/organization and the symbol of such. If we had actual experience, we could never be so easily fooled into becoming excited about anything except the real thing. And, we would know that by the real thing, we mean us building capacity to win and not just creating imagery to make us feel better without any positive changes in our material conditions.
The Panthers are gone today. Most of the people claiming to be Panthers now wanted nothing to do with the Panthers during the 60s. If you listen to people talk now, you would think the Panthers had millions of members when the reality is they never had more than a couple of thousand actual working members if that. And, of those who would join the BPP or similar organizations, too many of us were looking for someone to occupy the hotseat for us. Make all of the hard decisions. Someone to weather the criticism because we are not willing to occupy that position. Until we advance past this juvenile consciousness and accept the reality that liberation is a mass phenomenon we will never move forward. until we have mass, collective cadre leadership, we will continue to come up short. There are never going to be anymore Huey P. Newtons, Eldridge Cleavers, Malcolm X’s, Kwame Tures, etc., to occupy the position of “leader.” And, there shouldn’t be because we don’t need “leaders.” What we need are organizers who are willing to work with our people to establish and build foundation for real political power. And by political power we don’t mean the occupation of individual elected positions within the capitalist system (with no mass movement to hold those individuals and the system accountable). What we mean is what Kwame Ture defined as “the power of the organized masses of people” meaning a movement controlled by the masses, not individuals. This reality represents power so mass and collective that one, two, or 20 people cannot control it and/or be coopted by it. A movement so broad that no matter what individuals do and/or come and go, we will retain capacity to carry forward in an organized direction representative of mass decision making processes and actions.
To his credit, Kwame Ture came to understand the need for collective leadership and his work within the All African People’s Revolutionary Party (A-APRP) after his time in the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee and Black Panther Party expressed this understanding. For the last 30 years of his life, Ture worked to make a contribution towards the A-APRP, Democratic Party of Guinea (PDG), African Party for the Independence of Guinea-Bissau (PAIGC), and other Pan-African formations becoming the collective cadre leadership organizations that we need. As a result of his efforts, this work continues today 20+ years after his physical transition which is the clearest example possible of why mass cadre leadership, not individual leaders, are important. When the individual leader dies or changes political direction their work stops. When there is mass leadership, the work continues regardless of what happens to individuals.
In the final analysis, we know who Eldridge Cleaver and Huey P. Newton are because of their monumental contributions to our struggle for justice. We should continue to honor those contributions, but we should also learn from their contradictions in order to help us build stronger mechanisms for our future struggle. May is African Liberation Day month. No day represents the push for mass collective African leadership more than African Liberation Day. Hopefully, we can use this year and future years of commemorating African Liberation Day to solidify the need for continued mass movement development.
ke a contribution towards the A-APRP, Democratic Party of Guinea (PDG), African Party for the Independence of Guinea-Bissau (PAIGC), and other Pan-African formations becoming the collective cadre leadership organizations that we need. As a result of his efforts, this work continues today 20+ years after his physical transition which is the clearest example possible of why mass cadre leadership, not individual leaders, are important. When the individual leader dies or changes political direction their work stops. When there is mass leadership, the work continues regardless of what happens to individuals.
In the final analysis, we know who Eldridge Cleaver and Huey P. Newton are because of their monumental contributions to our struggle for justice. We should continue to honor those contributions, but we should also learn from their contradictions in order to help us build stronger mechanisms for our future struggle. May is African Liberation Day month. No day represents the push for mass collective African leadership more than African Liberation Day. Hopefully, we can use this year and future years of commemorating African Liberation Day to solidify the need for continued mass movement development.

1 Comment

A Democratic Example within the Culture of Violence and Injustice

5/6/2021

0 Comments

Tupac Shakur performing at the A-APRP African Liberation Day at Oak Park, Sacramento, Calif, U.S., in 1991. The next year, we would be placed in a showdown with city of Sacramento that would challenge the strength of our democratic centralist practices

Within my recently released book “A Guide for Organizing Defense against White Supremacist, Patriarchal, and Fascist Violence” I make the argument that the medicine for transforming people within a backward, capitalist society is the institutionalization of mass political education programs. For most people who hear this, their thought is that we are talking specifically about reading books and gaining individual intellectual knowledge. This definition of mass political education couldn’t be farther from the truth.

By mass political education what we mean is a process where comprehensive history, ideology, and philosophy is read, without question, but that is only one facet of the program. The material must be read in groups and those groups must commit to engage in that process on a consistent basis i.e. bi-monthly, monthly, weekly, etc. Other key components of this process are facilitation of the sessions should be rotated so that everyone has the opportunity to lead discussions of the material. This is critical because this practice helps prepare all participants with the skills to facilitate sessions, not just one or two dominant individuals. The rotation also ensures everyone is participating and providing their unique perspectives of the material because the more perspectives, the broader the understanding of what is being read and discussed.

The other components of this process are criticism/self-criticism and democratic centralism. The book describes in detail how criticism/self-criticism and democratic centralism should be properly carried out so we will not go into detail doing so here. What we will do is provide a clear example of democratic centralism in action in real life and how that process of democracy works to strengthen our work even in the most adverse of circumstances.

In late May 1992, the All African People’s Revolutionary Party (A-APRP) organized African Liberation Day (ALD) as a commemoration of our worldwide fight to build a Pan-African fighting force to run the capitalist/imperialist crooks out of Africa, regain our homeland, and build a socialist future for the African masses. ALD had been the template institution for African liberation since 1958 and the A-APRP had been organizing ALD commemorations on its own and in coalition since 1972. In 1984, the A-APRP expanded its organization of ALD beyond just Washington D.C. to multiple other cities throughout the U.S. Sacramento, California, U.S. was one of those additional cities and it was during the A-APRP’s first organized ALD in Sacramento in 1984 that I signed up to join the A-APRP. From that year forward, every year, the A-APRP has continued to organize ALD. In 2019, the last year before the pandemic, we played a role in organizing ALD commemorations in 17 cities worldwide of which most of those events were in Africa (as it should be). In 2021, we continue to organize on the ground ALD commemorations throughout Africa as well as some select other locations, including a major webcast ALD on May 22nd, and May 25th. From 1984, through 2008, we organized on the ground ALD commemorations in Sacramento that attracted thousands of people each year. During that stretch we had in person participation from people like Tupac Shakur (1991 – see the video of his performance on youtube), Dead Prez, Mutabaruka, and the Coup, but none of the years stand out to me beyond 1992.

That year we had a serious tussle with the city of Sacramento with getting a permit for our event. The park we had carried out the ALD rally from 1984 through 1991 – McClathey Park, or what the local Africans called “the big Park” in Oak Park, Sacramento, was having a stage constructed in 1991/92. The purpose of the city building a stage was to facilitate the city organizing music events in “the Big Park” as a part of their plan to land grab and gentrify Oak Park away from the African, Indigenous, and poor European masses who dominated the neighborhood during those days. Prior to 92, no city events took place in that park. In fact, nothing took place in that park besides drive-by shootings, drug deals, and other innocent and/or often nefarious activities. The city had all but abandoned the park until this revolutionary Pan-African A-APRP began having its ALD commemorations there. This involved us constructing our small sectional stage (that I stored in our garage) in that park the night before the ALD rally and me and other comrades sleeping in the park to protect the space. Sleeping in that park year after year during that period I observed all types of things. We broke up countless fights that involved weapons, including guns. We gave shelter and fed countless people and we used those opportunities to engage in thousands of conversations with the African masses, the lumpen proletariat, about the work we were doing. As a result of our success with our ALD commemorations, the city saw the opportunity and built their stage. And, from 1993 through 2008 we continued to organize ALD on that new stage while the park became more known for the city sponsored events that included big name entertainers like Eric Bonet and Hally Berry. Our events continued without a single hair ever being out of place with no security except our own A-APRP forces while the city events – equipped with armed police and private security – had numerous violent episodes to the point where they eventually ceased having events in the park they reclaimed from us. Their arrogance never once permitting them to wonder why we had none of the problems they regularly encountered.

So, due to the stage construction we needed a new venue for 1992. The next viable option was William Land Park in the center of the city. We didn’t want Land Park because it was surrounded by a petti bourgeoisie European neighborhood which made our pre-rally march, an annual event in Oak Park, ill-logical. Plus, Land Park was the apple of the city. The open stage area which was frequently used for drama events sat right across from the city zoo and the playland facility. Not the place the city really wanted to relinquish to African revolutionaries. And, to be honest, we couldn’t really see ourselves operating in that location either, but our options were few. After having established ourselves in that side of town for the previous seven years, we didn’t wish to move the event across town. Plus, there were not many other options that had a stage and the other amenities we needed (dressing rooms, electricity, etc.). Still, the city hadn’t changed their minds so initially, they rejected our application. We had to seek out legal representation when the city told us they were not issuing permits for social events in the park. We filed documents indicating that African Liberation Day was no social event. It was a political demonstration against the oppression African people face and a call to action for African people to become free. The city suggested we take our claim to the state and try to hold our rally at the state capitol. We explained to them that our event was not to make a demand of the capitalist government, but to call our people to action and that is why the event had been organized within the community. Despite the fact we were not going to be at the Big Park that year, we felt confident that the people would travel the extra mile or so to join us in Land Park if we had the event there.

Forced with facing a first amendment violation, we are sure the city’s attorney’s advised them to approve our permit, but the city issued the permit for Land Park usage while denying us a sound permit. When we protested they told us that city ordinances prevented any noise in the area from interfering with the musical sounds coming from playland and the zoo. Our attorneys confirmed their right to do this and we were forced to consider how we would proceed.

That decision resulted in several contentious late night meetings to discuss how we would proceed. There were several contributing factors. May of 1992 was just weeks after the L.A. rebellions as a result of police terrorism against the African masses. It was also weeks after the U.S. government had bombed the home of Libyan Jamahiriya leader Muammar Qaddafi’s home in Tripoli, Libya, North Africa. The mood of the African masses was tense and none of us were in a compromising mood. The internal debate was over whether we would honor the fact we had no sound permit (how would we do that) or just defy the ban and have our sound amplified which would have been a violation of the law that the city made clear to us would result in legal, including criminal, charges being filed against us.

This is where the effective usage of democratic centralism within our organization came into play. I particularly remember the discussion held the night before the ALD rally. It was a Friday night in our house. About 25 people. We debated back and forth, vigorously for hours until at least 3am Saturday morning. The positions were articulated repeatedly and painstakingly. Adding to the tension was my own household occupied different positions on the issue. My comrade ex-wife was always one of the pragmatic forces within our work. We had already taken a hit from the city a few years before when complaints filed against us for wheatpasted posters of Muammar Qaddafi led the city to pull our address from previous permits and sue us for damages. We had successfully fought that and won, but the stress was apparent in our house because she didn’t want to face another challenge like that. I didn’t either, but more important to me was not letting the city dictate our direction, especially not at such a crucial time. We collectively argued back and forth and at about 2:30am, after no new points were being introduced (you know, that place where everyone starts repeating things – the clear sign that its time to take a vote), the question was called. I don’t remember the count of the vote, but I do remember that the vote to use sound won out. I also recall that my comrade ex-wife was irritated with me as I was one of the loudest voices of defiance against the city. The point here is that democratic centralism (and the principled stance of my ex – the reason we maintain respect for each other today) was apparent. Once that vote turned out as it did, after repeated battles over the years and people demonstrating their commitment to principled struggle over and over, everyone in that room knew that if anyone of us went down due to our decision, we would all go down together. Thus, is the nature of democratic centralism. Everyone has the collective responsibility to abide by the decision, even if you disagreed with it. In fact, those that disagreed had the responsibility to work the hardest for the outcome that won out because that would be the only honest way you could assert the correctness of your position. Obviously you couldn’t do that if you did anything to sabotage the outcome. That would actually validate the opposite position.

The trust in all of us honoring democratic centralism, regardless of personal positions was important to me that night because without a march, the start of the rally would be the time when our decision would come into play. And, as the M/C, I would be the one up there. I would be the target. I wasn’t afraid of that. My largest concern was not letting the people down. If the police stormed us and shut down the event we would not only lose credibility, but our people would get the message that we cannot organize and represent for ourselves and there was nothing I wanted to do more than prevent such a negative message from happening. So, after 3am, our task was to get some sleep. Since we were not in Oak Park, it was no longer required to sleep in the park with our stage, but after such a contentious debate, and the requirement to be at the park early, the idea of sleep was unrealistic. I remember laying awake and attempting to think it through. We knew from past work that if we had enough Africans in that park, there would be little the police could do. If we didn’t have enough people, we were in trouble. The uncertainty of whether people would show up to the new location kept me up. I recall that at about 5am my ex and I started making contingency plans in the event one, both, or more of us were arrested. Within the A-APRP we operated in the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee’s “jail, no bail” principle meaning if you are arrested, you are on your own. We didn’t intend upon ever making the mistake the Black Panthers did by making getting people out of prison our primary work (the Free Huey campaign helped the authorities recognize that they could derail the Panthers by locking up as many of the leaders as they could). Money was scarce, but despite our disagreement about the issue, we quietly discussed options in that bedroom in that house full of people who were undoubtedly having the same tensions. We knew, even in that bedroom that whatever happened, we would try to find some way not to leave anyone behind who was subjected to harassment by the police.
An hour or some and I was at the park. By 8am we had another meeting at the location to lay out our strategy to start at 1pm, no matter what. I was extremely nervous. Not for my role, but in the hopes people came out. By 9am it was already super hot. On its way to a triple digit day, I was unsure that people would be willing to come all the way to Land Park. I kept positioning myself into the bleacher seats which at least sat under shade trees. I prayed intensely to our ancestors.
Under what felt to me to be an intense atmosphere of tension we prepared. When the sound system was set up we did sound checks while watching for the police, expecting them to come down and try to arrest all of us.

By 12:45 you could cut the tension with a knife. It was about 95 degrees and I was sweating profusely. Not entirely from the heat, but I was also determined to represent our ancestors as best as I could. At about 12:55pm a phalanx of police, about a dozen of them, appeared at the top of the bleacher seat area, looking down upon us, but this this didn’t intimidate me, it emboldened me. My belief in our ancestors plus the knowledge that we were all there operating on the same page gave me more than enough strength. I couldn’t wait to hit that microphone and I did. I can’t even tell you what I said at 1pm, but it was probably one of my best introductions ever. I can tell you that I was highly inspired by the reality that despite the change in venue. Despite the heat. Despite no march, which always brought people into the event, there were at least 300 or 400 people already there and they were on their feet, participating with my words like a church audience with lots of verbal “talking back.” I talked about police terrorism in L.A. and everywhere. I talked about Africa being our home and how we would reach the point of organization where the police and the imperialist military would one day pay for their abuse of our people. The mike, the ground, everything seemed on fire to me as sweat stung in my eyes. I was up there continuing to fire people up with my eyes shut. I had almost forgotten all of the gestapos being there until I was alerted by comrade Nidamu that the police were approaching the stage. This prompted me to open my eyes, stinging and all. About eight of the police were marching down towards the stage as I introduced the first performer. I jumped from the stage to join Nidamu and other comrades in going to challenge the police when we were greeted by about 50 members of the audience who came down to intercept the police. Responding to my cries of this being our event and the need for us to exert our dignity in the face of repression, these wonderful African people were yelling at the police and telling them to leave. They surrounded the police and continued taunting them until a woman police smiled brightly and nervously towards me while offering a ring of keys in my direction.

“We just wanted to let you know someone left these keys in the trunk of their car!” She said in the sweetest voice. I took the keys and without acknowledging them further, returned to the stage. No one will ever be able to convince me that their intention was always to have eight police give us a set of keys, but once they saw the spirit of the people there wouldn’t be anything else they could do. Our strategy had worked! And even more important, our commitment and dedication to the principles of democratic centralism had ensured we would have the unity and focus to stick to our guns. Without that, there is absolutely no way I believe the events would have concluded that same way. I know I certainly could not have had the confidence I had without the assuredness that I had the full support of my comrades from that stage. People offered me praise for my performance that day, but I could never accept that. I knew that the victory was all of ours. I was simply the conduit of the expression of comradery and democracy we exhibited that night before. This is the strength of organized mass political education. This is the stuff that gives us the capacity to win. This is the formula that our enemies are afraid we will recognize and implement. This is the stuff we have to do because when we do, we will be unstoppable.

0 Comments

A Review of "Black Power and Post-Colonial Society"

5/2/2021

1 Comment

The 76 page “Black Power and Post-Colonial Society – Essays on Kwame Ture (Stokely Carmichael), Religion, and More”, written by Dwayne Wong (Omowale) in 2020, is another book presentation by Wong designed to present his views on a number of topics as he has done previously. Its important to honor Wong’s efforts because the topics he chooses to write about, in this book and other works, i.e. the political views of people like Malcolm X, Kwame Ture, and Assata Shakur, as well as the political struggle in Guyana, and religion among African people, are subjects where very little literature exists. In Wong’s own words, he approaches his work from his Pan-African perspective. This book is filled with analysis and as a result, it provides the reader with many components to consider. In this day and age where intellectualism is largely considered to be a negative, this is a very important contribution to any and all efforts to expand political discourse, particularly around issues impacting the African masses.

The challenges I left Wong’s book with were connected primarily to his section on Kwame Ture and Ture’s time in Guinea-Conakry working as a militant and Central Committee member within the Democratic Party of Guinea (PDG) and the All African People’s Revolutionary Party (A-APRP). After becoming known internationally as the face of the U.S. Black Power movement from the late 1960s, Ture moved to Guinea-Conakry and he spent the last 30 years of his life working to build Pan-African capacity based on the concepts demonstrated in Kwame Nkrumah’s 1968 book “The Handbook of Revolutionary Warfare.” I would do absolutely anything to find analysis somewhere, anywhere, that spends time exploring the work Ture did in Guinea from 1969 to 1998 (the year he made his physical transition). I already possess much of that analysis because of my time as a cadre organizer within the A-APRP, but for the African masses in particular and humanity in general, Ture’s period living and working in Africa is left as an enigma. And, Wong’s book does nothing to contribute towards dismantling this information shortcoming. Had he, Pernel Joseph, or any of the scholars who chose to write about Kwame Ture after 1968 bothered to take time to examine his work within the PDG/A-APRP during that 30 year period (and not just consistently reduced Kwame to a 1960s Black power/civil rights celebrity), maybe we could learn more about the day to day work Kwame did in the PDG and the A-APRP to build up the revolutionary Pan-African cadre Nkrumah called upon him and all of us to do in the Handbook? Maybe Wong and others could come to understand the critically important work Ture contributed to in helping the PDG further define its relationship to the African Party for the Independence of Guinea-Bissau (PAIGC), and for those organizations to do the same with the Pan-Africanist Congress of Azania (South Africa), the Azanian People’s Organization (AZAPO), the A-APRP, and other Pan-Africanist formations operational throughout Africa and the African diaspora. Anyone who has engaged in organizational work focused around building ideological clarity and unity has to understand the difficulty in the work Ture dedicated his life to. And, those of us alive today, who have interacted with all of those Pan-African entities, and their efforts to further solidify their relationships, certainly can provide testament to the degree of difficulty and importance of that work, and the importance Kwame’s contributions made towards advancing that work.

Also, if Wong and others had been able to spend more time understanding that critical work Kwame Ture was engaged in, maybe that could have contributed to them developing a greater understanding of the government of Sekou Ture in Guinea, the PDG’s policies and practices, and an assessment and analysis of the PDG and Sekou Ture that extends beyond the same imperialist authoritarian depiction of Sekou Ture that has been dominant within the capitalist media for 50 years.

In Wong’s book, he repeats the accusations against Sekou Ture and the PDG about them being undemocratic and abusive towards the people of Guinea. And, I’m not here to try and diminish the mistakes the PDG made and/or explain them away. My writings on the subject, including the long review I wrote on Joseph’s 2014 biography on Kwame Ture entitled “Stokely – A Life”, have gone in great detail to acknowledge the errors the PDG made through its struggles with corruption, Camp Borio, etc. Still, Wong, acknowledges the challenges the PDG faced from imperialism’s efforts to constantly overthrow Sekou Ture as legitimate. As a result, a much deeper analysis of this history reveals several things. Instead of reducing the narrative to one of Sekou Ture being a dictator and the PDG being undemocratic, we instead choose to suggest that after 500 years of colonialism, African people have the right to learn how to govern in new ways, under new systems. To develop processes that function outside of the capitalist system that has clearly subjugated us. We believe the PDG attempted to do this and like any mass movement/efforts, it is going to take time to iron out the contradictions. Unlike the perfectionists from the white socialist/anarchist left – who have never recognized any of what was just written as it relates to African and other colonized people’s self determination (while they have also contributed even less of any substance to our movements, or even their own communities), we recognize that these new efforts at building socialist political parties, one party states, came with some great things and some very poor things. Like any assessment, it is from these things that we build from to improve and do better. This is what a true revolutionary process is going to look like, the process that it is. In other words, to suggest that there is only one standard for democratic development and anything that falls short of that standard in any way is undemocratic is absurd (especially if the model, as it usually is, for democracy is the Western capitalist model). Mobutu ensured there were absolutely no semblances of democracy in the Congo from 1964 through 1997 when he was finally forced from power. And, not only was there nothing within the Congo during that 33 year period that can even be mistaken for democracy, Mobutu ruled with an absolute iron fist while being 100% supported by imperialism. Meanwhile, Sekou Ture and the PDG made the Local Revolutionary Power committees, or PRLs, the central mechanism within the PDG from which the people of Guinea were to participate within their government. These PRLs, modeled after the Committees in Defense of the Revolution (CDRs) in socialist Cuba, were set up all throughout Guinea to provide people with the vehicle to provide input and make local decisions on everything the PDG did. This was proven by the decisions made at the PDG’s party congresses, much of which reflected direct input from the people through the PRLs. There is absolutely no evidence that the PDG controlled PRLs on a national level. In fact, there is plenty of evidence of the PRLs tremendous, although not perfect, influence throughout the country. So, the suggestion that the PDG was undemocratic doesn’t make sense. If that were the case it would make no sense for them to place as much emphasis on the PRLs as they did. Instead, they could have just done as Mobutu did, and not even pretended to be democratic. Clearly, their intention was to create a people state. Now, the question of whether they were able to accomplish this is a different discussion and to that question, of course the answer is no, but an assessment for the reasons why the PDG fell short requires much more of an analysis than that provided by Wong, Joseph, and others writing about Sekou Ture and Guinea. Within the A-APRP we have always engaged in that assessment. And contrary to Wong’s statements about Kwame Ture’s unwillingness to criticize the PDG, I have sat in too many meetings throughout the U.S. and Africa, with and without Kwame Ture, to know that his criticisms of the PDG and its shortcomings in figuring out effective methods from which to root out corruption and elevate its democratic principles into wider practice were well established, before and after Sekou Ture’s death. Wong praises the PAIGC, and its founder Amilcar Cabral, for their work, which Wong identifies in contrast to the PDG, in working to develop more democratic structures throughout Guinea-Bissau. That deeper analysis I mentioned that Wong could have engaged in could have possibly led him to understand that a lot of what he is praising within the PAIGC is a reflection of the process we are engaged in to build Pan-Africanism. Both Kwame Ture and Amilcar Cabral were students of Kwame Nkrumah and Sekou Ture. Were it not for Sekou Ture and the PDG, Cabral would not have had a base from which to build the PAIGC that Wong praises. Without Sekou Ture and the PDG, Kwame Ture would not have had a base from which to develop and probably most importantly, Nkrumah would not have had a base to produce some of his most important contributions to Pan-African work taking place today. Cabral, and Kwame Ture, were co-founders of the A-APRP. And, Kwame Ture’s work within the PDG and PAIGC, and the A-APRP’s continued work within the PAIGC and PDG since Kwame Ture’s physical transition, are reflections of the lessons learned from not only Sekou Ture’s PDG, but Nkrumah’s Convention People’s Party and Kwame Ture’s Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee and Black Panther Party.

A single life that is adversely impacted is too many, but whether we like it or not, whether we admit it or not, we have to learn to crawl before we can walk, and errors can and will be made. Where these writings always fall short is that they are consistently unable to determine the difference between terrible errors based on inexperience and lack of political education, and practices that result by design to keep people oppressed. None of these writers can ever produce any evidence (they don’t even try to make the argument) that Sekou Ture and the PDG benefited financially, etc., from the errors they made. That’s why its difficult for us to understand why Wong and others, when assessing Sekou Ture and the PDG, seem to believe that their errors are not distinguishable from those made by imperialism and neo-colonialists.

Ironically, Wong uses Walter Rodney’s correct class critiques of Nkrumah and Sekou Ture’s governments (in Ghana and Guinea respectively). Then, Wong later states that Rodney himself acknowledged that Nkrumah’s analysis after being removed from power in Ghana (and becoming co-president of Guinea), addressed the results of those contradictions.

Its interesting to wonder what would have happened with the PDG in Guinea had Ghana, Mali, the Congo, and other potential progressive and Pan-African entities in Africa not been sabotaged, leaving Guinea isolated? Wong’s assessment of Guinea becoming “pro-imperialist” towards the end of Sekou Ture’s life doesn’t consider that possibility. What we do know is that when imperialism achieves that isolation on its enemies, and then imposes sanctions and other methods designed to turn the people inside against the government, as was the case in Guinea, a simple explanation that the regime turned “pro-imperialist” is insufficient. During the time of the early 80s when Wong claims this was happening, Guinea and the PDG was hosting A-APRP delegations, building with the PAIGC, MPLA, etc., and doing everything to support the anti-apartheid struggle in Southern Africa. All things that were certainly not designed to make the U.S. and imperialism happy. In 1982, when Sekou Ture came to the U.S., one of the major examples Wong and others refer to in order to suggest that Sekou Ture, in seeking U.S. financial investment (after years of declining it), was softening, Sekou Ture took action during that trip that actually solidified his position as an anti-imperialist. He took the unprecedented step, during a state visit to the U.S. of appearing at an event at Howard University in Washington, D.C., as the keynote speaker for the A-APRP. This is clearly not an action someone would take if all they are trying to do is appease imperialism. In fact, no other world leaders outside of Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, and Kwame Nkrumah (and maybe one or two others), have come to the U.S. and done anything similar.

Overall, Wong provides an informative book that everyone should read, but like everything, do so with a critical eye. If nothing else, it demonstrates the importance of political education more and more.

1 Comment

"Memorial Day" Another Dishonest Play for Emotion Extortion

Why Black Power/Unity Fully Realized Equals Pan-Africanism

Eldridge Cleaver, the Black Panther Party & African Liberation Day

A Democratic Example within the Culture of Violence and Injustice

A Review of "Black Power and Post-Colonial Society"

Author

Archives

Categories