Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

"If You Can't Be Better Than an N-Word, Then Who Can You Be Better Than?": The Perpetuation of White Supremacy in Apartheid America
"If You Can't Be Better Than an N-Word, Then Who Can You Be Better Than?": The Perpetuation of White Supremacy in Apartheid America
"If You Can't Be Better Than an N-Word, Then Who Can You Be Better Than?": The Perpetuation of White Supremacy in Apartheid America
Ebook1,128 pages19 hours

"If You Can't Be Better Than an N-Word, Then Who Can You Be Better Than?": The Perpetuation of White Supremacy in Apartheid America

Rating: 0 out of 5 stars

()

Read preview

About this ebook

Americas elites utilize the divide-and-conquer strategy, and with African Americans, they have found their first target. Centuries of brainwashing have instilled a superiority high in many whites and at the same time placed blacks in less-than positions.
I intend to show to what extent Apartheidism and the less-than culture affect blacks in several different environments, such as how the criminal justice system is used to marginalize and criminalize blacks at rates disproportionate to their population. Even the sports world can be more problematic for blacks than for non-blacks.
I will present people and events that will show the double standards society has been led to not only accept but to expect, and just how easily we seem to have been manipulated. Most, and perhaps none of which could have been so relatively easily accomplished if the drug of superiority did not cloud our perceptions.
LanguageEnglish
PublisherWestBow Press
Release dateNov 13, 2012
ISBN9781449771362
"If You Can't Be Better Than an N-Word, Then Who Can You Be Better Than?": The Perpetuation of White Supremacy in Apartheid America
Author

Thomas Sass

Since finding the Lord in the mid-1970s, Thomas has been consumed by social justice, especially regarding African Americans. Most of his writings have dealt with ill effects of what he calls American-style Apartheidism, which enables the white supremacy mindset to continue virtually unabated. Having witnessed or read about countless injustices has moved Thomas—driven by his religious values—to write about a whole host of issues/events/people, some documented, some not on our radar. Thomas and his wife live in Iowa City, Iowa. He is sixty years old and retired from Pearson. Thomas Sass and his family escaped communist Hungary during the 1956 Hungarian Revolution. His father got into trouble fighting for his own brand of social justice. Thomas’s focus on social justice soon began to motivate him in ways that seemed to be not always within his grasp to understand, so he gives God the praise.

Related to "If You Can't Be Better Than an N-Word, Then Who Can You Be Better Than?"

Related ebooks

Politics For You

View More

Related articles

Reviews for "If You Can't Be Better Than an N-Word, Then Who Can You Be Better Than?"

Rating: 0 out of 5 stars
0 ratings

0 ratings0 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

    Book preview

    "If You Can't Be Better Than an N-Word, Then Who Can You Be Better Than?" - Thomas Sass

    "If You Can’t Be Better

    than an N-Word, then

    Who Can You Be Better

    Than?"

    The Perpetuation of White Supremacy

    in Apartheid America

    Thomas Sass

    logoBlackwTN.ai

    Copyright © 2012 by Thomas Sass.

    All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or by any information storage retrieval system without the written permission of the publisher except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

    WestBow Press books may be ordered through booksellers or by contacting:

    WestBow Press

    A Division of Thomas Nelson

    1663 Liberty Drive

    Bloomington, IN 47403

    www.westbowpress.com

    1-(866) 928-1240

    Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

    Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

    Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

    ISBN: 978-1-4497-7137-9 (sc)

    ISBN: 978-1-4497-7138-6 (hc)

    ISBN: 978-1-4497-7136-2 (e)

    Library of Congress Control Number: 2012918952

    WestBow Press rev. date: 11/08/2012

    Table of Contents

    Chapter I Introduction

    Chapter II Historical Perspective

    Chapter III Media and Blacks

    Chapter IV News Networks With particular emphasis on the FOX

    Chapter V The Legal System and Blacks

    Chapter VI Orental James (0.J) Simpson

    Chapter VII Sports and Entertainment

    Chapter VIII Affirmative Action

    Chapter IX Less Than

    Chapter X Zero Sum Game

    Chapter XI Political Disenfranchisement

    Chapter XII Race Matters (People and events in the news)

    Chapter XIII Observations

    Chapter XIV Keep the Faith – in God

    Chapter XV So, Where Do We Go From Here?

    FORWARD

    One of the the more important reasons for me to have written this book is to give content/context to issues/people/events/policies which I do not feel are articulated as well, as accurately, as often, or at all, by the so-called mainstream media. There have literally been thousands of stories, comments, video, along with other media forms of dissemination, that perpetuate stereotypes and/or do not reflect accurately what needed to be conveyed. My mission is to give a white male’s voice to the many disservices done to African-Americans. Why I, a white male, took on this project will be detailed in first chapter.

    This endeavor took twelve years to finish, no, not because of all the work I put into it—just the opposite. Unfortunately, I too often tended to procrastinate rather than finish my book. For example, I once took off an entire three year period after my wife and I lost our house to the 2008 Iowa River flood which destroyed my PC and, in addition, I inadvertently discarded the CD on which the manuscript was stored. One problem too much procrastination caused is that the tense used in parts of book were not appropriate. So much of what I had written in the twelve years had just occurred or was in the midst of playing out. I updated some of the tense, upon editing, but perhaps did not capture all.

    I want to provide an example, here, of how something can be presented, or for that matter, not even broached, which can impact directly/indirectly to debates we have on an issue affecting not just African-Americans, but all Americans—affirmative action. I have often heard this from white males; Why isn’t there affirmative action in the NBA? To which the reply should be—in my humble opinion—that from the inception of what is called professional basketball, and for its early decades, there was 100 percent affirmative action—for white males. Not until what I call the liberal form of affirmative action were Blacks allowed to participate. (I will get into why I capitalize the B in Black later). Why do we not hear above defense in the very many discussions/debates surrounding affirmative action? It just might alleviate at least some of the concerns that apparently many whites still hold.

    Whites and non-Blacks too often only regurgitate what messages are given them by the elites I feel actually control this country. A small part of that conditioning is the above cry for more whites in the NBA in the form of demanding/asking from those who defend affirmative action to defend the lack of whites in the pro league. But these very same elites do not often, through their surrogates in the media, give voice to what is truly transpiring before our very eyes, as if we were blind to them even happening. Example: our elites do not discuss this phenomena which is unfolding before our very eyes; the number of mostly white women not only in the sports world, but specifically in the two sports dominated by Black males—football and basketball at both collegiate and professional levels. Yet if you Google you will not find any studies/links even acknowledging what is taking place—again, right before our eyes. I believe it is because our elites have not made it an issue so it seemingly is below the radar. Can anyone imagine the outrage whites would be led to display if it were Black males in sports dominated by white females. Our elites would put this issue before us as often and in as many venues as they could,. It is my contention their hope would be to exacerbate tensions and further divide us along racial, social, political and economic lines. There would more than likely be much to peruse if you were to then Google that! My hope is that those who choose to read this book will do so with both open minds and hearts. I seek only to provide additional information for people to access when making decisions about a host of issues/people/events/policies, and to hopefully see them through less filtered/conditioned minds and make better decisions. People may well make the same decisions they would ordinarily have made, but at least they could sample perceptions to which they might not otherwise been exposed.

    Chapter I

    Introduction

    I need to quickly explain the title and why I feel it is not only right for this book, but also proper, in extremely rare cases, for white people, but especially for white males, to use the N-word.

    That was the original beginning of this book, for I had intended to use that most offensive of words in its entirety N_ _ _e r. That was my intent from the inception of this book until November 13, 2004 the day I replaced that most hateful of words with what appears to be the universally acceptable way to write and articulate it, especially for white people, but even more necessary for white males. I had given the idea of changing that word much thought from the first time I contemplated putting my views onto paper until actually pulling the plug on it. On that date—November 13, 2004 there were 35 examples of n _ _ _e r in the 580 pages of my then draft. I know the volume because I used the find function to change them all to the N-word. I experienced much angst over the usage of that word and went from wanting to remove it to leaving it in. I had intended to call the University of Iowa’s Black student union—I live in Iowa City—and speak with its members about my using it. I had thought about taking a draft of the book to their meeting place and reading some passages and then ask their opinions of whether or not to remove it. As well, I read parts of a Harvard University professor’s book, which happened to use that word as its title, which also gave me pause whether to use it. The professor is a Black male who wanted to give a history of the word and the dilemma faced by some for its usage.

    While I had issues with my handling of that word while writing this book, I believe the catalyst for my ultimately making the decision to change the word, on my own, without the input I had always intended to utilize, came from a television show that I will write much more about later entitled ‘Boston Public’. The show centered on an inner-city school in Boston, which just happened to have an inordinate number of white students, for reasons which will be explained later in the book. The episode which eventually prompted me to make this relatively significant change concerned the use of that word by people, but most importantly white people. A Black male student reacted negatively upon hearing two friends refer to each other as n _ _ _as. While he may have had a concern, as some on the show did, to even Black people calling each other by that or any similarly constructed version of that word, he happened to react to two friends he overheard joking with each other—one Black and the other white—much so that he assaulted the white friend and then had to defend himself from the Black friend. What happened next is what I believe was the strong motivating factor for the shows script being written in the manner it was. The teacher of that particular class happened to be a white male—a liberal one—who believes in talking through issues which can be as impactful as the topics themselves. Most of the Black students and Black teachers, including the principal (Black male), took umbrage with the white teacher’s attempts to be the one to lead the charge into exploring this word with his class. The white male teacher was almost fired for initially refusing the principal’s order not to speak to his class but eventually the show ended with the Black principal—who had been so very much against even discussing this hot topic—leading the class, himself, in debating the finer points of that word’s usage. That episode motivated me to replace that most offensive of words—especially coming from white males—to the more universally recognized way to handle such a delicate subject.

    In addition here is my inspiration for using the phrase, If you can’t be better than an N-Word, then just who can you be better than.

    One of the many significant events which occurred during the Civil Rights struggles was the murders of three Civil Rights workers in 1964, one Black and two white. They were murdered because they attempted to register Southern Black voters. The three Civil Rights worker’s names were Chaney, Goodman and Schwerner. There have been a couple of attempts to dramatize and capture on film the events surrounding their brutal murders. One of those renditions was called ‘Mississippi Burning’ a 1988 film which starred Gene Hackman and Willem Dafoe as two bickering FBI agents who seemed to battle each other as often as they battled those who murdered the three Civil Rights workers, in addition to the townspeople who, because of their actions/inactions, enabled this evil not only to exist but to prevail far too long. My inspiration, for the title, came from that movie I first saw in 1988.

    Mr. Hackman played the shoot-from-the-hip Southern veteran while Mr. Dafoe was the play-by-the-book Northern wonder boy. In attempting to educate Dafoe’s character about Southern life and culture, Hackman told a story, from his youth, which captures, in a nutshell, not only the theme for this book, but the doctrine that permeates our national culture. This doctrine is continually programmed into us; one which espouses white supremacy, at the expense of non-whites, but Blacks, in particular. It is analogous to—There but by the grace of God go I. Your good fortune could well be reinforced, but better yet, your misfortune could well be lessened because there are those whom you personally know, see, or read about, who are less well off than you. Chances are good that these less well off people might make you feel more fortunate, and due to the constant brainwashing of supremacy to which whites are subjected, it may virtually be impossible for most not to feel somewhat superior, as bad as that may sound.

    As a young boy, Hackman’s character often rode into town with his dad, a farmer. Along the way they needed to pass a farm whose owner was like most other farmers in that area—poor—but with two notable exceptions: one, which would normally be tolerable—his ownership of a prized mule; but, combined with the second exception—the farmer was Black—proved too much for Hackman’s dad, and apparently other whites in the community. Whenever the young Hackman’s character and his dad passed the Black man’s farm, his dad would mumble negative beliefs. Then one day Hackman’s character, after having heard that the Black farmer’s prized mule died mysteriously the previous night, had the occasion to pass by the Black-owned farm the next day with his dad. But this day, the first in Hackman’s memory, his dad had a smile on his face. When questioned by his son as to why he seemed so pleased, the dad happily spoke the title of this book.

    Addendum: January 2005 brought us news that a Klan leader is being prosecuted for the murders of the three Civil Rights workers. Moral/adage: Better late than never. Justice does not seem to serve the African-American community as well and as quickly as other communities, but especially the white community.

    It does not seem to be as stressful or have as negative effect on whites when other whites are more successful. While there might well be traces of jealousy, in seeing other whites be more successful, it does not begin to rise to any levels which strains acceptance. Sure there are class-warfare messages which have filtered through our political and social fabric but they are only that—rhetoric—language and messages which will never, ever be allowed to go anywhere under our system of government. The poor will always be with us—especially if conservatives have their way. and, the poor will never be allowed to do unto the well-off what whites have done to Blacks.

    That line, If you can’t be better than an N-word then just who can you be better than, captures the essence of what this book will attempt to expose. The collective mindset which has permeated American culture is one of white supremacy and the need to have others, but in particular Blacks, be examples to whites that while they may have it bad, it could always be worse, they could either be N-words or have N-word’s burdens in life. This is similar to what the powers-that-be have conjured up for us—TV soap operas—which have all the necessary unfortunate happenings occur to characters, some more than others, that most viewers can then take comfort in knowing that while yes, they personally have some unfortunate things occurring in their lives they at least have it better than those poor bastards they see weekly having to endure so much more. But unlike television shows where writers script some poor souls to have repeated instances of bad luck the objective in real life is relatively simple—keep a segment of society, one that can relatively easily, but continually, be kept in places so that other groups can then say There but by the grace of God, go I. I pray that is not viewed as being sacrilegious, using a Biblical phrase in such a way, but I feel that it captures the essence of the mindset which we’ve been conditioned to have.

    * * *

    Next, I want to explain why I capitalize Black. I want to see African-American people being recognized in the same ways as other groups. I know that not even African—Americans are doing this, or at least any that I have heard or read about, but it is what I want to do and since this is my book I will do so. I know that sounds bad (This is my book and I will do so) but so be it. It is my way of showing respect to a segment of society that does not get anywhere near the respect they deserve, especially in comparison to most, if not all, other groups.

    * * *

    There was a television show entitled N-Word which I have seen twice. I believe it was produced in 2004 and it aired on a channel by the name of Trio. This word was addressed in several different ways—from its supposed origin, to its history, to who can and who cannot use it, etc. Many different people were interviewed for their thoughts on this word and most of them were Black—no surprise there, I suppose. It was the type of show for which I would love to have access to the written dialogue for many times throughout the show things were said that struck me as more profound than my little mind could absorb quickly enough before the next dialogue. So before I had time in which to analyze and completely digest what had just been said, yet another interviewee came along with other tidbits of information which I then had to digest. Consequently, some of which I believe I would like to have had more time to analyze was not allowed me. Hopefully, the next time it airs I will tape it for future listening and learning.

    A white man (one of the liberal stars of the aforementioned television show ‘Boston Public’, Michael Rapaport, the one who wanted to teach his class the meaning of N-Word) was one of those interviewed and I am glad he was because he came at this from a perspective that his character on the show did not strike me as having—a distancing from the word—albeit grudgingly, but a respect—out of fear—for its use by those not allowed—non-Black people, but especially white people.

    Another interesting point of view on N-word came from a comedian, who also happens to be one of the more respected and enlightened activists of the 1960’s Dick Gregory—a Black man, who asked what would be the consequences if Germans opted to change history by making the word Swastika the S-word, or the words Concentration Camp the C-word. He obviously does not feel that these attempts would be welcome, or allowed, without much resistance, and I happen to agree. But he also offered up this word—lynching—becoming just the L-word. He does not appear to believe that too many would welcome that either and I, again, agree. So his point, from my perspective is this—why dare attempt to change history by allowing anyone opportunities to desensitize people to their ugly histories—for if we forget history we are doomed to repeat it. But the comment that struck me most and perhaps will stick with me the longest is something that another comedian, Whoopi Goldberg, said. When describing the lack of respect it has, and perhaps the too frequent usage this word is getting, she pondered why this particular word was finding its way into the lexicon of so very many, including whites, while other so-called words were not finding anywhere near the acceptance by anyone, and which were respected and/or feared to be used, especially by those not having a special affinity for it. The one word she happened to choose is spic. She offered this word and asked just how long any person (non-Hispanic, of course) would last if they used that word with a Hispanic person present. She asked something along the lines of whether or not people felt they would be stabbed for using that word. Now, I will be the first to admit that the particular way she phrased this debate was stereotypical, and perhaps uncalled for, but she has, in my humble opinion, made a valid point. I do not believe that anyone would be stupid enough to try to use that word with a Hispanic gang banger present or any other Hispanic person who might instill fear in the non-Hispanic person. In other words, do not use that word otherwise there might be consequences. And her point was well taken, in my book. Other words mentioned during this show which should not be used are: Kike and Dago. I do not believe that anyone would dare to use any of the above three mentioned words without knowing just how much trouble might erupt. But, the N-word doesn’t seem to have that same respect from non-Black, but especially white people. And, the N-word doesn’t seem to create the same fear factor from non-Black people as do Kike, Spic, and Dago. Kike is a word that I, personally, have not heard used for it seems most of my life, and honestly, about the only times I have heard its usage is just how I have presented it—words that should not be used in speech that others have put forth. So people have only used that word—Kike—in describing what words can and cannot be used. again, I, personally, have not heard/read anyone use that word except as rules of dialogue. What has been my personal experience is of people telling/warning me not to do/say anything which might upset Jews for I could get into trouble. I could lose my job or something like that is what I have heard many a time when people broached this area—anything which could be construed as being anti-Semitic. No one ever told/warned me that I might be beat up, or I would have to fear someone—in the physical sense—as many in our society have said about Blacks and Hispanics for that matter. For there has never been any Jew whom I have ever heard of who had the physical presence to instill any amount of fear, physically-speaking, of course. But there have been plenty of Blacks and Hispanics who have been put forth as physically threatening, but especially Black males. And there have even been Black women who have been so tagged. I have often thought that what I have just wrote may well be why Jews—who have an inordinate amount of power in media, and not just Hollywood—would/could so demean Blacks and Hispanics. People—non-Black/non-Hispanic—fear most Black and Hispanic people, but coincidentally/ironically, it is Blacks and Hispanics who do not fear Jews, and it has only been white people who have cautioned me to beware Jews, and their powers, which emanate not from physical forces but from economic ones.

    * * *

    Feelings of white supremacy have always been associated with fringe groups such as Neo-Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan, but several years ago I began to feel that these attitudes were not just held by a few reactionary groups but, in fact, permeate our culture in as many ways as they can be introduced: the educational system; media; the justice system; etc. Any tool which is at the oppressor’s disposal has been, is being, and more than likely will continue to be used to introduce us to all that we are to believe, and that, of course, includes our class/race-conscious attitudes.

    I have never heard anyone, not even the most ardent Black revolutionary, state that the white supremacy movement exists outside of a few small groups of extremists. Perhaps I have not been privy to anyone who has espoused such a seemingly controversial stand solely because that type of literature and\or commentary is not readily available for mainstream consumption. But that is my belief, and I stand by it. I believe I know just how inflammatory this book will be for most Americans, especially those who are white, male, and conservative. And perhaps it will also be a hard pill for others, such as white liberals, who know, full-well, how to talk the talk, but are far too often quite silent when it comes time to walk the walk. This perception, whether it can be fully substantiated by me, in this body of work, is the challenge before me. I have wanted to write this for some time now, several years as a matter of fact, but have only relatively recently put together the motivation to do so. But as it turned out, per usual, my knack at procrastinating has affected even this book. I have taken much longer to put this together than I had originally dreamed it would take—that is once I finally got down to writing it. While I got off to a relatively decent start it gradually tapered off to the point that there were many times when I wrote nothing at all for one or two month intervals. Unfortunately, this eventually turned to years.

    * * *

    To better understand my motivations and my perspectives you will need to know certain things about me. The single most difficult task that I have ever had to do in my life was to sell myself, so to speak, such as during interviews for jobs or promotions. So, I may not be the best person to tell you about who I am, as a person, but I will make an attempt to do just that.

    Where do I start? Where should I start? My religious faith might well be the best place to begin since my whole perceptions of life are based upon the enlightenment that, I believe, the Lord has shown me. Mind you, I do not want anyone to believe that I am suggesting that the Lord has chosen me, and me alone, to spread these words, but there are times that I do feel like a voice in the wilderness—white person’s world only—when it comes to, at least, some of my beliefs. I was, and still am—but hopefully to a lesser extent—a weak man. Some of my all too many weaknesses have been overcome, but only through the power of prayer. These weaknesses included my physical and/or psychological addictions to cigarettes, marijuana, and alcohol. I had tried, unsuccessfully, for years, to stop these debilitating vices, but it was only through the power of prayer that I was not only able to stop, but to stop immediately, and thanks goes to God, all so very easily. Thanks to, and glory be to God, I have been able to abstain from all three vices for thirty plus years. Over the years, my faith has served me well, I believe, in seeing the light, so to speak, on most, if not every issue that I sought guidance. In re-reading that it will be all too easy for those who want to attack my credibility to seize upon this as arrogance on my part. I pray that it is not arrogance but only my very strong belief that the Lord would not allow me to be so public about such things, and then to be so very wrong. Unfortunately, there seems to be an overabundance of others who seemingly are in the same places that I am religiously/spiritually-speaking but whom I feel to be very wrong. But with that said though, I suppose that I, too, could be wrong.

    We all have the freedom to go in the directions that God’s gift to us of a free will leads us. Hopefully, many are taking the paths which the Lord wants us to take. One of the reasons I feel I am on a righteous path is the adage ‘the path of least resistance’ inspiration. In my humble opinion, the others who believe they, too, are walking in the light appear, to me, to be taking the paths of least resistance. They are all too often taking positions that do not offer them much, if any, resistance. I speak of right-wing religious people whose missions appear to me to differ from what I believe God wants us to do. These groups frequently become intolerant of others, especially those of different groups, such as Blacks. So with that said, I do take comfort in who I am. I can only pray that it is not arrogance which makes me feel so good about my positions but it is that I am helping, in some ways, to achieve God’s will. While I do not want to belabor my religiosity, I want to give God all the credit He deserves for opening my eyes, for I believe There are none as blind as those who will not see. I thank God for enlightening me, just enough, to see the many injustices that have been, are, and invariably will continue to be inflicted upon Blacks. And while I am an eternal optimist—I say that because I believe in the Bible and that Heaven on Earth will someday be upon us—I do not see as much hope for the plight of Black people, for a number of reasons, not least among them is the apathy that is usually shown by whites at the continued inequality toward Blacks, whether it is an old inequity or a new one that has recently been instituted. According to a relatively recent Washington Post survey, and in conjunction with the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University, majorities of white Americans incorrectly believe that Blacks are as well off as whites in terms of their jobs, incomes, schooling, and health care. Apparently, those in charge of the survey are unsure as to why so many whites believe such things: hostility; indifference; ignorance. On rare occasions, the truth still comes out, that Blacks still lag behind whites in access to jobs, pay equality, schooling, health care, etc, but it seems that a preponderance of disinformation to the contrary gives illusion that equality is the norm.

    I thank God for also opening my mind, for A mind is like a parachute, they both function best when open. I thank God for instilling in me a yearning to seek out the truth and to see that all of God’s children are given equal treatment. And yes, I suppose that would also include well-off, well-connected white males who so thoroughly control all aspects of power and who are also responsible for whatever oppression others, especially Blacks, suffer. Think about that non-believers—is there any other segment of American society who has, and still does, at least to some extent, oppress other groups? One would think that all these many blessings I have been given would lead me to much contentment, and at some levels they do and so much more than I believe I am worthy. But, at other levels, it can also be quite frustrating. Ignorance is Bliss. Were I uncaring of others, especially those whom I perceive to be the most oppressed, then not having these blessings would allow me to live life only for myself, and perhaps at least some similar peoples, and not worry about others. That might lead some to ask, well how does he feel about others who are also oppressed and treated, as less-than people? While I do have much sympathy for non-Blacks who are in such predicaments, it is toward Blacks for whom most, if not all, of my energies go. Why? I can only surmise. But I believe it has to do, in part, with my sense that Blacks have so much more going against them and so very few allies. Of the relatively few allies, most, if not all, tend to be silent on so many issues that would/should normally bring allies out in large numbers with as much support as they could muster. There might be some who believe that there are non-Blacks who are in similar predicaments as Blacks and have it just as bad. I would strongly argue against that thesis, but again it is a matter of perception, and wiser people than I have said that perception is reality. God is the only one who knows the truth about which of His children has it the worst. The mission that I feel God has placed me on involves the plight of Blacks in America, but more so Black males because persecution against them seems to be more intense than Black females. For you see this is not my first venture into putting my two-cents worth into this battle, for I have, on many occasions, written letters-to-the editor of several newspapers and have only recently ventured into doing this on-line, via emails, to the FOX (Fascists, Ostracizers, Xenophobes) news network, of whom more will be forthcoming.

    * * *

    The second thing I want to share with you about myself, that I believe needs to be mentioned, are my political leanings. I have called myself a Socialist, or at least an anti-capitalist. I have some Socialist beliefs, but whether I am a true Socialist, I will leave for others to decide. At the very least, I am an anti-capitalist. But I believe that human nature, being what it is, it is unlikely that Socialism could ever be successful here on Earth, but that Heaven will be Socialist, in at least some aspects such as: common ownership of whatever means of production exists in Heaven; a sharing of the work and then sharing of the wealth; from each according to his ability, to each according to his need; aside from God, His angels, and any others He anoints, there will exist a non—stratified society where all are equal—in other words—Heaven, in my humble opinion, is anti-capitalist in every respect. There will not be a select few who will be able, due to the fruits of other’s labor, enrich themselves, however nobly it may be, especially at the expense of those over whom they have control. To those who see a contradiction of a Socialist/anti-capitalist living in a capitalist society, I say this—I am also a vegetarian, not a strict vegetarian, but one who eats no meat. I have been a vegetarian since December of 1981, and became one only because in my readings from the Bible. Jesus, to my knowledge, only ate fish and other non-meats. So that is all that I eat. Given that, I would be the first to admit that if I were put into a place/situation where the only edible foods were meat, I would be more than willing to partake of as much meat as I needed to survive. In that sense, I see no contradiction in participating in capitalism to survive, but only to the point of surviving. In either case, I do not need to like it, but only to partake of it in order to survive. Would I attempt to enrich myself to ensure that my family and I would be able to lead comfortable lives—of course? The same as I, a vegetarian, would store up meat in order to survive in a non-vegetarian society. In addition, since we are human we are susceptible to human nature, and human nature being what it is, not even anti-capitalists are immune to capitalistic vices. My wife and I have several rather expensive commodities of which we own more than one. I happened to write that because I believe it was Mahatma Mohandas Gandhi who wrote that if you have more than one of any item you have one that belongs to someone else. It has bothered me, on occasion, the more expensive items we own more than one of but not enough to give them up or give them to others who lack them. My weakness?

    What my political beliefs have to do with my hunger for equality may rest in the idealistic writings of those who saw the evils of capitalism and the class systems which inevitably would need to be created to accommodate the stratified system that capitalism needs in order to perpetuate itself. These great thinkers, saw these caste systems for the evils they truly are and how certain groups would always be at the bottom, whether or not that could be justified in anyone’s mind. The pyramid or hierarchy that capitalism creates would manifest itself in all aspects of life in any capitalist society. There is a need to keep some groups down, even within the same subgroups, such as white women are still not equal to white males.

    As mentioned earlier, I also believe that human nature being what it is, that it would take much effort not only to first of all create such a Utopia, but also to then maintain it, for I do not foresee some people wanting to share anything with others. That is another evil trait of capitalism—it breeds competition to the point of it permeating into the very fabric of our daily lives. Every phase of our lives is affected by competition, so much so, that it would be almost impossible for it to refrain from rearing its ugly head, and probably at the most inopportune times. Capitalism breeds and rewards competition while Socialism breeds and rewards cooperation. So, instead of multiple capitalistic groups working together, toward common goals, each group has its own self-promoting interest group which has the net effect of dividing groups and usually along racial lines. As any oppressor knows, the best way to conquer, and then continue to rule, is to divide groups, as much as possible. A Rock and Roll standard from the sixties pleads, For united we stand, divided we fall. In addition, Abraham Lincoln said, A nation divided against its self, cannot stand. There have been some who have suggested that the United States will join the ranks of past great nations, who were, in effect, conquered from within, rather than conquered by outside forces. It might be more appropriate to suggest that the U.S. will crumble from within, rather than having an outside force conquering it.

    Given all our internal divisions and strife, just how much longer can this nation stand?

    * * *

    Now that you know why I chose the title, and where it came from, I want to tell you why I wrote this book and its purpose. There are far too many injustices that have occurred, are currently occurring, and will inevitably continue to occur, unless some things are done to stop them. I am only one person, with many limitations, who believes that there is a plan in my life to do something for others, to hopefully make things such that they are afforded the same opportunities, the same access to whatever they may need, etc., as others. While I cannot focus on all of the world’s problems, I am now attempting to focus on the one that has interested/consumed me for so many years—the plight of African-Americans in America, and as mentioned earlier, more specifically Black males.

    I have put my mouth, and our personal computer, toward the end that I have dreamed of for years—to write about this from a perspective that does not seem to see the light of day, at least often enough for my liking. I very much want to give voice to these views and allow others opportunities to read and hear them, and then hopefully make educated choices about them, regardless of what those choices may be. I believe I have whatever it will take to absorb any negative reactions that come if they are reactions that are done from a scholarly point of view. If someone, after reading and or hearing about this body of work, proceeds to tell me that I suck, or that the book sucks, then that will not do anything for me, other than to perhaps give me more incentive to continue the fight. But if some were to come at me with constructive criticism, then the debate will continue. And, from my perspective, that constructive criticism has to come with additional information and from perspectives I have not seen these issues being discussed. That is my intent—the single biggest reason that this is being written—to give these issues perspectives that I believe sorely need to be injected into equations in order for people to have all sides presented so that decisions made, whether they be by individuals making choices about how they interact with others of a different group, or done by a governing body whose decisions could impact us all.

    As I said earlier, this may be arrogance on my part for believing that only I have these insights—so be it if that is what anyone believes. The bottom line, for me, is that this information gets into public discourses as soon as possible, and as often as possible, because the other side has had, continues to have, and will invariably have, most, if not all, of the opportunities to express their points which run counter to what I believe.

    There is something else that I know needs to be explained, and very quickly, perhaps as quickly as to why I chose the title—and that is the many statements I make about Jews. I do not believe myself to be an anti-Semite. I believe, and very strongly, that my religious values prevent me from such anti-God beliefs. I believe that we are all God’s children, and that in being such, we are all loved by Him. We are all eligible to gain entry into Heaven, regardless of which religion we have chosen, regardless of which path we have chosen to be near Him. So, apparently, unlike most other Christians, I do not believe that my all-loving God could possibly not allow his other children into Heaven because they chose different paths. I believe that Heaven is analogous to some exotic vacation site that all want to get to—all right, not all, apparently, but an overwhelming majority. The owner of this exotic vacation resort, wanting to ensure that all have access to this fabulous site, would ensure that there were many access roads available so that people from all over the land could get to it without too much trouble. That is how I see Heaven, all of God’s children can make the trek, albeit from different paths, but nevertheless all will have access roads/paths to get to the Promised Land. But… there are things that I write that could easily be misinterpreted, and I can readily see why. But I felt, from the bottom of my heart, that these are things which need to be said publicly, in relation to this thesis. I know that at least some of these observations have been made before, publicly. Those which have not probably have been made privately.

    I am a strong believer in a united front, which means that all people need to come together in whatever commonalities we share. And once we have come together then we can make a better life for all of us, and not just a relatively few of us. I am a strong believer in the right of Israel to be a nation-state. And that nation-state should have the full protection of the United States. But that protection should know boundaries. And that protection comes with a price. The United States should only be a protector of Israel if they are attacked by other nation-states, and our protection needs to include parameters past which no Israeli government can go. We cannot allow for all the things that Israel has done/is doing/and invariably will continue to do in her supposed self-defense. They cannot be allowed to continually target children, especially by having snipers shoot out their kneecaps which make them permanently disabled. These sharpshooters, and those who command them, need to be brought before international tribunals and tried as the war criminals that they are. We cannot allow for the utter destruction of the homes of Palestinians just because relatives have been arrested, whether those arrests can be proven to be legitimate or not. My God, not even the Nazis practiced such terrible and inexcusable things. Perhaps the Nazis were not as vengeful as the Israelis and wiser in that they took possession of those properties and did not destroy them. Yet, Israelis routinely get away with this and many other atrocities. I do not disprove of any country taking defensive actions, but few democratic nation-states in the history of the world have sunk to some of the dastardly things to which Israel has resorted. Nation-states have the right to defend themselves, but that can and should be done without utilizing brutalizing methods.

    In relation to this book, one thing about Israel needs to be brought out that does not, for whatever reason(s), get much play in the media. During worldwide sanctions against the Apartheid South African nation, which eventually also included a reluctant United States that had to be drug to the moral high ground by world-wide and nation-wide outcries, Israel continued to stand alone in her defiance of those sanctions and continued with her assistance to South Africa. That assistance included both military and intelligence-sharing which were the two most essential things South Africa needed to continue with its oppression of her Black majority. Why would Israel stand alone in her defense of such a morally corrupt country? Is it because they, too, are a renegade nation that is soon to become a minority of the nations’ population but with the assistance of the United States oppresses the soon to be majority, which is Palestinian, in Gaza and the West Bank? So, in that sense the former Apartheid South African nation and Israel were comrades-in-aims, so to speak. But why has Israel never been held accountable? Many former South African leaders were held accountable, some of them even while they were still in power. Is it that seemingly some Jews, more than I care to imagine, regardless of which country they live in, seem to have problems with Black people? I know that there has been friction between Jews and Blacks in this country ever since I can remember. I will be the first to admit that Blacks either directly or indirectly caused some of that friction. But Jews have directly or indirectly caused some of that friction as well. But I have better things to do with my time than to get into a debate about which of the two are more responsible for that friction. Besides, that would not accomplish anything of substance.

    What do you think would have happened if the United States had instead been the welfare daddy of a Black African nation, to the same extent as we have been for Israel? And that Black African nation, also constituted a soon to be minority government made up of only Blacks, and they controlled and oppressed the soon to be majority, which happened to be Arab. And let us say that the former Apartheid South African situation were different, in this way: the soon-to-be minority government was made up of Black Africans, while the majority of those they oppressed were Jews. And now let us say that the welfare state we supported—the soon to be minority controlled Black nation—went against the entire world and continued to do business with this new South African nation, which was now oppressing the majority, who happened to be Jews. My question is this: Would that Black nation not have been held to a higher standard than Israel had, and continues to be? I dare say that they would have been. And that higher standard would have continually been introduced into every single conversation surrounding that Black nation. And that higher standard would have continually been introduced into every single article surrounding that Black nation. Every single time there was mention of that Black nation, directly or indirectly, and whether or not any representatives of that Black nation were present or not, their past history would be made mention of ad nauseam. And they would never be able to outlive their past misdeeds. But Israel has been given a very huge pass on this. Haven’t they? Why? Why the double standard? Why are Israelis not continually asked about why they had continued to support such an evil nation, an evil nation that continued to brutally repress its Black majority? Only God knows how much longer Apartheid South Africa was able to maintain its wicked control due to the direct and indirect aid of Israel. But it should be mentioned that since the United States is the welfare daddy of Israel, America was, by default, indirectly aiding South Africa, and thereby helping them in their continued brutalization of the majority Black population. I have a strong suspicion that United States rulers knew full-well what was being done by Israel, just like it knows full—well what Israel is doing with at least some of the welfare it still gets—continuation of its repression of Palestinians, and only God knows what other new evil misdeeds they might be up to.

    If some influential Black Americans had a history of making life less than comfortable for most Jews in this country, and they continued on with that history, would they not be held to higher standards than influential Jews are held to in their relationship with most Blacks? Would their past transgressions not continually be brought into every single discussion, whether it included a Black person or not? So why have some influential Jewish-Americans, who have a history of making life less than comfortable for most Blacks in this country, and who continue along those paths, not being held accountable? Why are they not being asked about their past and current transgressions, such as the ways that so many Blacks have been, and are still, portrayed in Hollywood? There is one and only one group in this country, for which political correctness is absolute and that, would be for Jews. Every other single group has had scrutiny put on them. Every other single group has had negative things said about them, many with impunity. Blacks have had everything imaginable, said about them. Blacks have been scrutinized every way imaginable. As a matter of fact, I believe that no stone as been left unturned when it comes to what has been put out there about Blacks. One is hard pressed to come up with any negative things that have been said about Jews since WW II. And if somewhere, sometime, negative things were said about Jews since WWII, please search your memories and come up with one single negative thing that has stuck and is something which is often repeated, and in ways that would be demoralizing to the group it is directed against—Jews. The rare times something is brought up, even in an exploratory fashion, it is quickly turned against the persons/group that brought it up. And when it is turned around, the persons/group is automatically labeled as being anti-Semitic. And that anti-Semite label would stick to them as snugly as any label has on any person/group whether warranted or not. And it would be brought up and used ad nauseam. Surely, Jews are no better than any other group. Surely, Jews need to be held to the same standards as all non-Jews. Surely, they, too, have faults, which could be publicized to the point of overkill, such as everything that is either negative or can be perceived to be negative about Blacks. It doesn’t even have to be anywhere nearly as bad for Jews as it is for Blacks, but could they not afford to have it as bad as say some other group, other than Blacks?

    Let me reiterate—I do not hate Jews. But the ones whose policies and comments, which had, still continue, and invariably will continue in the future, to do anything to keep Blacks down—those Jews I do hate, and with a passion. But, I also hate, with a passion, those of any other group who fall into that same category of oppressor. So, would that make me anti-Irish? Would that make me anti-Italian? Would that make me anti-German, etc. etc… ? Of course, that would not. No reasonable persons would conclude that negative comments or even inquiries about someone would relegate that person/group raising it with being anti the entire group of which they speak. That would be pure nonsense. But for whatever reasons, negative comments about any Jew, negative comments about Israel, or even comments which could be construed in a negative light, are quickly turned around on the person/group making those comments. Those persons/groups are then tarnished with an anti-Semitic label and they are forbidden from making any further comments. They, in essence, are so ostracized and put into a place of limbo that you rarely, if ever, hear from them again. Is there a hit team in place, to protect Jewish Dom—whose sole design and purpose is to listen for anything even remotely negative, and then quickly round up its forces for retaliatory strikes? I know that some political candidates have people on their staffs whose only reasons for being on the payroll are to do exactly that against the enemies of their benefactors, whether the enemies are real or perceived. Let me put this as simply as I can. Let us say that there are ten Jews in a room or, for that matter, ten people of any other group. You either know, or believe, that one of them has done, is doing, or will attempt to do, something that goes against everything that you believe in. Would it be wrong to point that out? Would it be wrong to question that Jew or the person from another group? And if you believe you have evidence against that one Jew, or the person from another group, would it be wrong to use that evidence? I would hope that most thinking people would concur and not only say that it would not be wrong, but that there is a moral imperative which mandates that it needs to be done. And it would be wrong for any Jew, or a member of any other group, or any representatives of Jews, or representatives of any other group, to label the questioner as being anti-Semitic, or anti whatever the other group happened to be.

    Not to belabor the point, but I will. Let me put this yet another way just to make sure we are all on the same page, so to speak. If a fan of a football team singles out one or two members of their beloved team for actually doing something wrong, or if they just believed that the players did something wrong, would that fan then be labeled as being a non-fan? If any were to say yes, then I do not believe that any team or any celebrity has any fans for even fans can find fault with those they idolize.

    The last time I heard, Israel was a foreign nation. They are not part of the United States. Anyone who says anything critical of Israel is not labeled as being anti—American, but every single American/Israeli Jew, that I have ever heard, does label all American non-Jews, and for that matter even Jews who are critical of Israel, as being anti-Semitic. Why? And why are all American Jews seemingly so pro-Israel? What do you think would happen if only a fraction of American Blacks, let alone seemingly the entire American Black population, were so pro any African nation, up to and including past the point in which it were not in America’s best interests? Would they not be chastised at every turn? Would they not be labeled as anti-American? And even if it were only a fraction of Blacks, the entire race would still be attacked if they did not automatically, and with much venom, attack those Blacks who were giving such aid and comfort to a foreign nation, even if it were a Black nation and an ally. Of course, this type of judgment is not made against American Jews, specifically or generally. No, they have never been queried as to their patriotism? Why not? Why the seemingly double standard? Why the free pass, which no other group would be given, especially Blacks? Jews, whether they be American, Israeli, or of any other nationality will never be attacked, or at least an attack will never be allowed to go unchallenged. An attack against one is an attack against all: whether they are a Democrat; whether they are Republican; or whether they are even American. I want the United States to protect Israel but only from outside attacks. But I do not want my tax monies used to continue Israel’s oppression of Palestinians, or any other evil misdeeds they are doing or might do in the future. I want the right to be critical of any Israeli policy, which I disagree with, and not be labeled as an anti-Semite. I want the right to be critical of any Jew without being labeled an anti-Semite. I want the same rights, as an American, which I have with any other group/nation being granted back to me, and all other Americans, with respect to Jews/Israel. And I do not want to see a situation exist where Americans, Black ones, are in positions where anything and everything can be said/written about in negative ways, with relative impunity, but we cannot say/write anything we want about a foreign nation’s peoples without being burdened by the anti-Semite label

    So, I go into this knowing that, at least, some will attack me for being an anti—Semite. And powers, whether seen or unseen, will be used to prevent me from having my say on anything. That is if this book ever sees the light of day, which is problematic. I am not saying that Jews are the only ones who might have problems with at least some of the content of this book. Conservatives might be at the forefront of any attacks leveled against me personally, or any arguments leveled against anything in this book. This may be foolish of me to say, and may have consequences to it, but I do not fear any conservatives that I see on television, nor any conservatives whose opinions I read in newspapers. And I do not fear any Jew that I see on television, or any Jews whose opinions I read in newspapers. But, I do fear whatever attacks may be directed against my family, whether it comes from conservatives, from Jews, or more than likely both, if this book sees the light of day. Let me be clear about one thing—if any family member, aside from my wife, even suspected that I was writing such a book—even knowing full—well the odds of it seeing the light of day—they would all counsel me from going forward. They all would advise that it is not in the best interests of the family for me to write on such issues; issues that invariably will inflame some groups. They would advise, in the strongest possible terms, against associating the family with such controversial beliefs.

    So, if this book does get published, I ask that any attackers, and there will be attackers, have whatever it takes—balls, manhood, common sense—to attack the source of their anger—me, and to please refrain from attacking my family. For my family, as I said, is not to blame for my views. My family is not to blame for my putting these views into book form. My family is not responsible for publishing this body of work. My family is not, in the least, responsible for any of this. So, my attackers, I pray that you only come after me. I am the one who has chosen to take the heat. I am the only one who should be held accountable for whatever views you happen to disagree. So, I am the only one on whom you should set your sights.

    Conservatives often use the anti-American label whenever anyone dares to attack them in any way, while Jews seemingly always utilize the anti-Semitic label. I cannot think of many persons/groups—after the Red Scare of the 1950’s—that have not been able to continue with their agenda after being painted with the anti-American label. In fact, some wear the anti-American label as a badge of honor, especially when it comes

    Enjoying the preview?
    Page 1 of 1