The DISH

Unbossed and unbought news and information you can use

Vol. 14 No. 2…Dedicated to the Dialogue on Race…January 10, 2011

DISHing It Up Hot!

Human Rights in USA

By Dot

On December 10^th, Human Rights Day came and went. For US mainstream media it was a non-event. No one in the USA seemed to care, except Susan Rice, US Ambassador to the United Nations, who made a perfunctory speech filled with sound bites based on the fantasy of equal rights.

Apropos, the long-awaited release of the Scott sisters, Jamie and Gladys, garnered more media attention. Finally freed from a Mississippi prison where they spent sixteen (16) years for an armed robbery that netted less than $200 dollars and killed no one, this gross injustice and human rights abuse could only happen to black women in America, a fact of life Rice neglected to mention in lauding the USA human rights record.

Other unmentionables that would taint its record include the plight of black farmers, who continue to lose land despite the recent claims settlement for past USDA discrimination, and the black economic depression gripping urban areas across the nation. A cursory examination of US unemployment statistics show who bears the brunt of US unemployment. No question the lack of employment is having a devastating impact on the welfare of black Americans. Long term black unemployment, which is due in part to the nation's historic institutionalized racism, has rendered black men, young and old, either front-line fodder for a flagrantly aggressive foreign policy that they surely do not understand or inmates in the prison-industrial complex, where they are viewed as less than human. Either track represents a slow genocide for blacks.

While Rice's Human Rights Day address received no media attention, plenty was paid to the new congressional leadership's decision to read the US Constitution on the floor of the House of Representatives. Even I was impressed, until I learned they would not read the section legalizing slavery. Unquestionably, this select reading obscures the founders' original intent and renders the entire exercise moot, simply another stealth attempt to whitewash US history to make it more humane and infinitely more appealing than the ugly truth. This nation fought a civil war over the supremacy clause (Article 1, Section 2), which is the Great Compromise to legalize slavery. And, even after the Civil War, the US Supreme Court (1896) handed down Plessy v. Ferguson, the separate but equal doctrine, which was based on the supremacy clause.

Plessy was not overturned and ruled unconstitutional until Brown v. Board of Education (1954) mandated the integration of public schools. As the history of the integration effort shows, while blacks applauded the Supreme Court decision, whites developed creative ways to grind Brown into the ground. Similar to the Republican promise of death to "the jobs killing Obamacare" by "a thousand cuts," southern legislators, who were then the majority in the Democratic Party, promised to legislate, litigate, and frustrate public school desegregation. And, southern whites succeeded in making desegregation meaningless, even in some instances when it meant closing schools for black and white children. In regards to the equal education of black and white children, the dismal record speaks for itself. Moreover, in many respects, the public education system remains largely segregated after fifty-five (55) years of Brown II's "all deliberate speed." Mission accomplished!

Given this impressive record on their side, I believe Republicans when they tout the demise of health care "by a thousand cuts." I also believe they could care less about human rights, health care or anything else that can possibly benefit the "others" identified as three-fifths in the Constitution. In fact, I am willing to bet they would rather cut off their noses to spite their faces than do anything that would improve the lives of black Americans. After all, denying black humanity is an integral part of their human rights heritage.

Human Rights Day

By John Burl Smith

Prior to the creation of the United Nations in 1948, the United States proudly and boisterously affirmed its commitment to white supremacy. The Emancipation Proclamation (1863) sounded the death knell for legal involuntary servitude in Southern states that were in rebellion against the United States, and the 13th Amendment (1865) extended that edit to the entire nation. Ending slavery via the Amendment process and establishing a mechanism, the Freedmen Bureau, to aid former slaves in their transition to freedom encountered staunch resistance in many parts of the US, requiring federal troops in most Southern states to wrench meager concessions or access for blacks promised by the newly won freedom. Many historians today believe a process to re-enslave blacks in the South began almost immediately after the signing of the 13th Amendment.

Most formidably, bankrupt Southern states saw a solution to a wrecked economy in the wording of the 13th Amendment, if they could get federal troops out of the South, which would allow them to run their affairs as they saw fit. White politicians saw billions of dollars in slave wealth vanish with Emancipation. Moreover, as freedmen, former slaves were demanding money, which whites did not have, and were competing with whites for scarce resources. From their perspective, now worthless blacks were vagrants, sitting and walking around when there was plenty of work to be done.

Some scholars believe the deal -- ending Reconstruction, withdrawing federal troops from the South and allowing Southern states a free hand to deal with the "Negro problem" -- between Rutherford B. Hayes and Southern politicians that gave Hayes the presidency through the vote in the Electoral College in 1876 also was a tacit agreement not to oppose how the South interpreted the 13th Amendment. Without restraint, Southern States latched onto the statement "duly convicted" to fashion a system that forced the newly freedmen back into "involuntary servitude."

Slavery by another name, Southern states passed laws that gave sheriffs and justices of the peace carte blanche to incarcerate former slaves and their descendants on the flimsiest, if not entirely bogus, charges. Created exclusively to entrap blacks, a system of force-labor, terror and intimidation became the underpinning for what became a death trap for thousands of blacks. Convict-leasing and selling debt incurred by those trying to avoid jail became a commodity in a system designed to produce free labor for mines, mills and plantations to rebuild the South's economy and generate revenue for Southern states. This system gave white men willing to waylay or kidnap blacks and those with a need for labor willing to use merciless brutality to force blacks to work a means of making money.

Woodrow Wilson, a Southern racist from Virginia, was elected president in 1912 and openly supported re-enslaving blacks in the South. During Reconstruction, it was acceptable to appoint blacks to federal government middle and lower level positions, such as post masters, customs officers, agents, clerks and secretaries. While Wilson talked of grand humanitarian goals for the world through the League of Nations, he issued executive orders that halted the hiring of blacks and mandated segregation in federal offices. Wilson's efforts to entrench segregationist attitudes and polices throughout the federal government remained dominant until the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt (1932).

The hand of Providence moved unexpectedly in favor of slave descendants when the US was drawn into WWII. This fortuitous event cast a different international light upon the South's neo-slavery technology. Recognizing the propaganda value to Germany and Japan of America's black citizens still being held in slavery in 1942, Roosevelt ordered the US Justice Department to begin prosecuting whites in the South that were still holding slave descendants in involuntary servitude for debts in violation of the 13th Amendment. Roosevelt's action acknowledged that the federal government knew slavery never ended as had been claimed for almost eighty years. The federal government and the US Supreme Court had permitted whites in the South to continue enslaving blacks even after making them 'citizens.'

The United Nations did not accept excuses from Germany and Japan for using slave labor during WWII but said nothing about American slave labor camps. The UN is critical of North Korea, Iran, Cuba, China and Russia for human rights violations but refuse to hold the US to the same standards. It refuses to raise issue with the US which used vicious dogs against and clubbed demonstrators in the 1960s, a clear human rights violations, even though the US refuse to apologize for its racist past. During its Universal Periodic Review before the UN Human Rights Council, the US ignored such human rights violations against African Americans by not acknowledging ongoing racism, as though a statute of limitation had expired. Moreover, the US refuses to even engage in a dialogue with slave descendants as a means of reconciliation regarding its human rights violations.

Although lawlessness against Africans Americans (1865 through 1950) is well documented as being sanctioned by the US government, United Nations Ambassador, Susan E. Rice in her statement commemorating Human Rights Day said, "Today, I join President Obama in commemorating the 62nd anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We reaffirm the wisdom of its drafters, who gave eloquent voice to the cause of human rights and human dignity in the wake of World War II. And we honor those who risk persecution in the service of its brave ideals. The United States has long worked to live up to the promise of our own founding documents, with their credo of liberty and equal rights under law. Our willingness to measure our deeds against our words and acknowledge our shortcomings has continually renewed the promise of America and given us strength."

If this statement is more than a bunch of words for international consumption, the US will back it up with an apology to slave descendants for its many atrocities over the years and express a willingness to engage in a meaningful dialogue on race. However, thus far the US has refused to "acknowledge our shortcomings," as it continues to refuse to admit that it allowed African Americans to be held in slavery as late as the 1940s. As such, the US has not done as other nations that were guilty of using slave labor during that same period (WWII). President Barack Obama is using the fact that America's slavery during this period occurred in the South as an excuse not to address it as a violation of slave descendants' human rights.

Intuit's Vibe

What Are You Fighting For

By Phil Ochs

Oh you tell me that there's danger to the land you call your own

And you watch them build the war machine right beside your home

And you tell me that you're ready to go marchin' to the war

I know you're set for fighting, but what are you fighting for?

Before you pack your rifle and sail across the sea

Just think upon the Southern part of the land that you call free

Oh, there's many kinds of slavery and we've found many more

I know you're set for fightin', but what are you fighting for?

And before you walk out on your job in answer to the call

Just think about the millions who have no job at all

And the men who wait for handouts with their eyes upon the floor

Oh I know you're set for fighting, but what are you fighting for?

Turn on your TV, turn it on so loud

And watch the fool a smiling there and tell me that you're proud

And listen to your radio, the noise it starts to pour

Oh I know you're set for fighting, but what are you fighting for?

Read your morning papers, read every single line

And tell me if you can believe that simple world you find

Read every slanted word till your eyes are getting sore,

I know you're set for fighting, but what are you fighting for?

And listen to your leaders, the ones who won the race

As they stand right there before you and lie into your face

If you ever try to buy them, you know what they stand for

I know you're set for fighting, but what are you fighting for?

Put ragged clothes upon your back and sleep upon the ground,

And tell police about your rights as they drag you down,

And ask them as they lead you to some deserted door,

Yes, I know you're set for fightin', but what are you fightin' for?

But the hardest thing I'll ask you, if you will only try

Is take your children by their hands and look into their eyes

And there you'll see the answer you should have seen before

If you'll win the wars at home, there'll be no fighting anymore

Bit of History

Southern Response to Brown

Until 1954, 17 states and the District of Columbia required racial segregation in public schools. Four other states permitted school districts to opt for segregation without state law requiring it. Desegregation efforts began in 1954 with the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, which ruled racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional because separate facilities are inherently unequal.

The Court did not stipulate how the states were to correct inequities or what deadline would be imposed. Instead, the Court invited interested parties to prepare briefs directed at means for implementing the Court's orders. Representatives of ten Southern and Border states advised the Court on how the Brown decision might be realized. The state officials cautioned against the issuance of specific instructions or set guidelines by the Court, recommending that the determination of whether school districts were in compliance with Brown be left to Federal district courts.

Thurgood Marshall and his staff of NAACP lawyers implored the Court to set September 1955 or 1956 as the deadline for ending segregation, and to issue explicit instructions to the district judges. Marshall argued that black children ought to be able to enjoy constitutionally guaranteed rights immediately, not at some distant time in the future. The Court rejected Marshall's advice. In its implementation decision (Brown II) handed down in 1955, federal district judges were ordered to supervise desegregation with "all deliberate speed."

Save for an occasional Texas or Arkansas district with few black pupils, the South made no voluntary move to comply with Brown. In the Border states of Delaware, Maryland, West Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri and Oklahoma, however, progress was made as school districts in these states moved toward desegregation. Cities such as St. Louis, Baltimore, Washington, Kansas City and Louisville demonstrated that large cities with substantial numbers of black citizens could desegregate without violence or disruption.

However, in Southern states, there was no progress, and hostility to desegregation was growing as every effort was made to fight the Supreme Court's decision. Aspiring politicians vied with one another in promising the extremes to which they would go to prevent integration. In Georgia, "Marvin Griffin was nominated for Governor...on the pledge: Come Hell or high water races will not be mixed in Georgia schools." In Virginia the Governor announced: "I shall use every legal means at my command to continue segregated schools." George Wallace told the people of Alabama: "I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."

In the Deep South, the chosen path of massive resistance called for law after law designed to "legalize" circumvention of Brown. This "litigate and legislate" strategy called for the extended litigation of each of the questionable integration-thwarting statutes. When one law was overruled by the courts, by a long and costly process, the legislature or local school board merely passed another law or regulation designed to preserve the status quo. (Hence the popular saying, "As long as we can legislate we can segregate.")

In resisting Brown, Southern solons displayed far more ingenuity, energy, and boldness than they ever expended in resolving the problems of poverty, illiteracy, malnutrition and illness, which have plagued the region. A multitude of laws were hastily enacted. In Texas, the progress that had been made immediately after Brown was reversed by a state law that withheld state funds from school districts that integrated without prior approval having been registered by the district's citizens in a referendum." The Georgia, Alabama and Virginia legislatures forbade desegregation even when ordered by Federal Courts. Several states offered tuition grants to parents of white students wishing to send their children to private schools to avoid desegregation. In Arkansas and Virginia where integration had been ordered by the courts, public schools were closed, denying an education to both blacks and whites. These and other laws were passed with full knowledge that they contravened Federal law and were therefore unconstitutional. That these statutes were obviously illegal brought no shame to the policy makers who violated the meaning if not the letter of Federal law. Instead, obstructionist state legislators were honored as folk heroes in the best Johnny Reb tradition.

Defiance achieved new respectability when in 1956, 96 members of the United States Congress signed the Southern Manifesto. The Manifesto condemned the Brown decision, commended those Southern states that had announced a policy of resistance to desegregation, and declared an intention to use "all lawful means" to bring about a reversal of the decision.

Official acts such as these gave the trappings of legitimacy to the resistance movement, and by placing ends above means encouraged the worse elements of Southern society to take any steps perceived necessary (including violence) to stop desegregation. Local recalcitrance became something of an art form as Southerners sought to legislate, litigate, and frustrate the implementation of Brown.

By 1957, their tactics ground what little voluntary integration there had been to a halt. The tone for future events had been set by the most rabid racists in the South. (Source: Harrell R. Rodgers, Jr. and Charles S. Bullock, III, Law and Social Change: Civil Rights Laws and Their Consequences, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972, pages 70-73)

Hood Notes

Black Farmers Still Losing Ground

By Stephen Patterson

A new federal lawsuit settlement won't stem the decline in black land ownership, activists say.

It only took 11 years and 10 floor votes. In late November, Congress finally agreed to pay black farmers $1.15 billion in compensation for decades of discrimination in lending practices and access to US agricultural subsidy programs. The claims stem from a civil-rights lawsuit settlement reached in 1999 between 400 farmers and the government.

But even as payouts begin, America's black farmers are still losing ground-literally. "It's not restitution for what's been done," says Gary R. Grant, national president of the Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association (BFAA). "Folks still don't understand that farmers are continuing to lose."

The number of U.S. farms operated by black farmers decreased by a staggering 97 percent between 1920 and 2007 (925,710 farms to 30,599) farms, according to government statistics.

The BFAA, a national nonprofit organization based in Tillery, N.C, with more than 1,500 members across the country, works to reverse black farmers' losses by connecting black farmers with services and monitoring the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). For the newly settled lawsuit, known as Pigford II, BFAA worked with a coalition of other black farmers' organizations to lobby for relief through Congress, Grant said. The group is now helping claimants obtain their due in the Claims Resolution Act of 2010.

The total sum to be claimed by black farmers is $1.25 billion, as Congress approved $100 million under the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008. (They aren't the only group seeing justice: The Claims Settlement Act of 2010 also included $3.4 billion in restitution for Native American farmers, who won a lawsuit against the government for losses due to mishandled trust funds. In October, another group of Native American farmers won $680 million in a discrimination lawsuit filed against the USDA.)

But Grant says that because the approaching relief is no panacea for black farmers, the organization is working to call attention to the continued decrease in black- owned farms before there are none. In October, BFAA hosted its first annual Save the Land: Black Farmers Benefit and Rally, in Tillery, to "bring awareness to the plight of the continued decline of black farmers and black land ownership."

The BFAA is planning additional events in 2011, perhaps in New York City or Washington D.C., to generate awareness of black land loss and empower black farmers to stand their ground. (Visit bfaa-us.org for more information.) Grant says the goal is to educate the public on the true standing of black farmers in America. "The farmers who were involved in Pigford are still trying to merely survive," he says. "Many people don't understand that land is not only power. It is an economic base that brings about independence and creates safe spaces for people to stand their ground." (Source: www.inthesetimes.org/article/6741/black_farmers_still_losing_ground)

Venue for an Artist

Alleged Beating After Peaceful Protest (Excerpts)

By Dr. Boyce Watkins

Reports are coming out of Georgia that prison guards have retaliated with violence in response to the Georgia Prison strike that took place last month. According to Georgia State NAACP President Edward Dubose, inmates have been beaten with hammers and other foreign objects allegedly in retaliation for their participation in the strike. President Dubose says that one inmate has been beaten beyond recognition and another has suffered significant brain damage.

The Department of Corrections has remained stoic and silent on the matter, even to the point of denying that a prison strike took place. But advocates for inmate human rights have argued all along that the conditions in Georgia prisons are simply unacceptable.

"Since the start of the December 9 peaceful work stoppage and appeal for reform and respect for human rights, some inmates have been targeted and others have simply disappeared. We are urging the Department of Corrections and Governor-Elect Nathan Deal to act now to halt these unjust practices and treat these men like human beings."

In the course of the strike, the inmates demanded access to education, better healthcare, fair parole decisions, the right to a fair wage for their work (which is currently unpaid), job training programs and an escape from cruel and unusual punishment. Although inmates are not paid for their labor, many of them are charged for routine healthcare and phone calls to their families. Some have argued that it is inconsistent for someone who is unpaid for their work to be expected to pay for prison services. In a conversation I had with President Dubose, he mentioned that there are reports of inmates even being forced to shine shoes for guards and give them haircuts, which he connects to a form of slavery.

The Concerned Coalition to Respect Prisoners' Rights held a press conference earlier this week to respond to the reports of violence against inmates. One of the conference co-chairs, Elaine Brown, said "These new developments have increased our fears and our legitimate call for more access to inmates."

The group, in conjunction with the NAACP, plans to file a lawsuit or civil rights complaint about the abuses taking place against inmates.

While the individual case of the Scott Sisters was certainly significant, the Georgia Prison strike represents the greatest opportunity for reform of our nation's broken criminal justice system. Nearly every African American in this country has a brother, sister, father, child or other relative who has had their future crippled by the historically-slanted justice system here in the US. The time is now to support the efforts of inmates to at least ensure that they are given access to basic human rights and the opportunity to come back to their communities as productive members of society. This is not a black thing or a criminal thing, it's an American thing.

One of the points being consistently made on this issue is that helping inmates have access to basic human rights is not a matter of being soft on crime. At this point, the prison industrial complex is the largest creator of criminal activity in our society. When inmates are left uneducated, sexually/physically abused, unemployed and permanently marginalized from society, their likelihood of committing crime is that much greater. Being tough on crime means being tough on recidivism, and right now, the prison system is solely designed with a profit motive that provides incentives for incarcerating as many people as possible. That is why the United States is a world leader in the number of people it has behind bars. Apathy from citizens and lawmakers is one of the tools being used by corporation captains to make money off slave labor (yes, this is literally slave labor, since the 13th Amendment clearly states that slavery is allowed for those who've been convicted of a crime). The temptation to enslave more Americans only grows with globalized wage pressure from nations like China and India, leading some corporations to lay off workers so they can "hire" prison inmates for almost nothing.

President Dubose informed me that Congressman John Lewis took the liberty to reach out and offer support. It is my greatest hope that other members of the Congressional Black Caucus will see the urgency of this matter in their own states and do the same. Additionally, Attorney General Eric Holder and President Barack Obama should have it impressed upon them that there is a very serious and urgent need for the two most powerful black men in America to directly confront the system that is destroying the lives of so many black boys. One of out of every three black boys born this decade is expected to spend time in state or federal prison. We must come together to save them.

About Me: Dr. Boyce Watkins is founder of the Your Black World Coalition and the "Never Going Back" initiative to challenge mass incarceration. He has appeared on many national media outlets. (Source: www.blackmeninamerica.blogspot.com)

Update

Scott Sisters Freed!

After serving 16 years in a Mississippi prison for an armed robbery that netted between $11 and $200, Jamie and Gladys Scott were released on Friday. In an order signed by Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, Jamie, 36, was freed because of her medical condition, which costs the state approximately $200,000 annually for dialysis treatment. Her sister, Gladys, 38, was freed on the condition that she donates a kidney to her sister within one year. Evidently, the idea of donating a kidney in an effort to save her sister's life originated with Gladys.

Barbour, who recently praised the racist White Citizens Councils and recalled the civil rights struggle of the 1960s as not being that bad, will not win any friends or influence anyone by signing this long overdue release order. Barbour is no great humanitarian; this is merely a stunt to aid to his political aspirations. According to New York Times columnist Bob Herbert, releasing the sisters, "should be an easy call for a law-and-order governor who has, nevertheless, displayed a willingness to set free individuals convicted of far more serious crimes. Mr. Barbour has already pardoned four killers and suspended the life sentence of a fifth." After the decade-long call for mercy in the Scott Sisters' case, Barbour finally responded, but only after his buns were being held to the fire over his comments about life in the South and racists that made life miserable for blacks.

The Scott sisters plan to move to Florida, where their mother and adult children reside. Their lawyer, Chokwe Lumumba, spoke with the media about their release and immediate plans, which include a good meal, some clothes, reunion with family members and a chance to spend time with each other. Apparently, the sisters have been separated for all these years even though they were housed in the same Central Mississippi prison.

For more on the Scott Sisters' plight, you can read the transcripts of The State of Mississippi vs. Jamie and Gladys Scott online at www.scribd.com/doc/21748820/Scott-transcript and the original indictment at www.scribd.com/doc/21748521/Scott-Indictment.

Mailbox: E-Mails, Faxes and Telephone Calls

Email www.examiner.com ...Young Black Males Bear Brunt of Economic Crisis...By Billy Wharton...While Manhattan salaries surged this year, up 12% because of Wall Street's recovery, young black males continue to bear the burden of the economic crisis. A new report by the Community Service Society (CSS) indicates that only one in four young black men between the ages of 16 and 24 in New York City is employed. The group tied the shockingly low employment rate to the effects of the economic crisis, which rendered already inferior jobs training and alternative education structures even more ineffective. The declining possibilities for young Black males is one feature of an overall surge in unemployment among work age Black males. The CSS reports an increase in unemployment from the already inordinately high 9% in 2006 to 17.9% in 2009. Youth workers in general have also suffered during the crisis surging to 24.6% unemployment. In addition, unemployment is not a short-term experience for the Black community. While all those with jobs who became unemployed were out of work for an average of 6 months, Black workers faced an average of 12 months before employment. The CSS identified education as a key factor in the unemployment rate for young Black males. The figure of one in four employed rises to one in ten for Black males who do not hold a high school diploma. Unemployment figures for the Black males in the 16-24 age group with no high school diploma is hard to determine since 84% of the young men in this group are out of the labor force entirely. The CSS report was only able to identify 8% in this category who were employed from January 2009 until June 2010. Such discriminatory trends in employment are feeding the prison pipeline. A 2010 MIT study of incarceration and inequality confirms the findings of the CSS report. The incarceration rate for young Black males without high school diplomas has surged since 1980. In 1980, these young men faced a 10% incarceration rate while in 2008 this number had increased to 35%. This speaks to the existence of a conscious social policy at work in the US, which favors incarceration over addressing issues of educational opportunity or job creation.

Email www.nytimes.com ...The Texas Omen...By Paul Krugman...These are tough times for state governments. Huge deficits loom almost everywhere, from California to New York, from New Jersey to Texas. Wait -- Texas? Wasn't Texas supposed to be thriving even as the rest of America suffered? Didn't its governor declare, during his re-election campaign, that "we have billions in surplus"? Yes, it was, and yes, he did. But reality has now intruded, in the form of a deficit expected to run as high as $25 billion over the next two years. And that reality has implications for the nation as a whole. For Texas is where the modern conservative theory of budgeting -- the belief that you should never raise taxes under any circumstances, that you can always balance the budget by cutting wasteful spending -- has been implemented most completely. If the theory can't make it there, it can't make it anywhere. How bad is the Texas deficit? Comparing budget crises among states is tricky, for technical reasons. Still, data from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities suggest that the Texas budget gap is worse than New York's, about as bad as California's, but not quite up to New Jersey levels. The point, however, is that just the other day Texas was being touted as a role model (and still is by commentators who haven't been keeping up with the news). It was the state the recession supposedly passed by, thanks to its low taxes and business-friendly policies. People used to say that the future happens first in California, but these days what happens in Texas is probably a better omen. And what we're seeing right now is a future that doesn't work.