The DISH

 

Unbossed and unbought news and information you can use

Vol. 8 Issue 14…Dedicated to the Dialogue on Race…April 8, 2005

 

 

 

Venue for an Artist

I’m the Son of Viet Nam

By James A. Stelly

 

When I came out of my high school

I did not feel I was a fool

I heard my country call and say

My Son, I must take you away

I wondered why some were deferred

Those who answered were preferred.

 

On foreign soil I found a place

No one judged me by my race

I saw my brothers fall and die

They said I had no time to cry

So all day long I had to fight

And, no one heard me cry at night.

 

In time, I could not understand

Why was I killing my fellow man?

So, I asked the dead please help me see

Why are you, too, killing me?

I killed the pain with booze and dope

And, I came home and saw no hope.

 

When I came home, they spit on me

They called me baby killer, you see.

Not one of you could fill my place

Why didn’t you see the hurt in my face?

I didn’t come home to do you harm

No one thanked me and took me by the arm.

 

To you I say you’ve got some nerve

Why hate me ‘cause I chose to serve

Far from home in a place I dread

Oftentimes, I wished I was dead

At least over there I knew who to attack

But the enemy here always stabs in the back.

I’m America’s child, but she’s not my Mom

I’m the Son of Viet Nam.

 

About Me:  From slavery to the current condition of blacks, Stelly poetically expresses his views on a variety of subjects in his collection of writings “Not Then, Not Now, Not Ever.”  Reflecting the pride of his people, Stelly boldly proclaims his freedom and determination to allow no chains to enslave his creativity.

 

News You Use

VRA Re-Authorization Campaign

Recently, representatives from more than a dozen national organizations, including Nation of Islam, Progressive National Baptist Convention, American Civil Liberties Union, etc., held a press conference in the nation's capital to announce a campaign to press Congress to re-authorize the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The VRA, which was extended during the Reagan Administration to 2007, was passed by Congress to add enforcement powers to the Fifteenth Amendment.

Critical enforcement provisions that include Justice Department clearance before changing voting procedures and language and other assistance at polling places expire in 2007. To prevent this from occurring, the coalition plans to launch a nationwide campaign to educate the general public on the importance of the Voting Rights Act. Plans include a petition drive with the goal of collecting 1 million signatures to encourage congressional re-authorization of VRA.

Other events include two massive marches and rallies. Scheduled for August 6 in Atlanta, Georgia to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the VRA and October 16 in Washington, DC, a 10th anniversary Million Man March, these events will press Congress to reauthorize the VRA and highlight the state of black America; participants will rally for jobs and health care.





Bit of History

Julien Stelly (?-1896)

Most of what is known about Julien Stelly comes from his family's oral history and newspaper accounts, including an interview with Dr. O.W. Martin, the man that led the militia that killed Stelly in March 1896. Julien Stelly was a prominent figure in Port Barre, Louisiana. Respected by his peers, he had many followers. Stelly also owned a considerable amount of property. On the Negro vote, he had taken a firm stand in favor of blacks exercising the franchise; he refused to be swayed by threats made against him and his family. Even though some of his relatives disowned and distanced themselves from him, Stelly held steadfast to his beliefs and registered to vote.

Martin and a contingent of armed men converged on Palmetto, Louisiana. Their stated objectives were to prevent Negroes from registering to vote and to protect the local registrar. On Friday, March 30, 1896, Martin's militia met an even larger group of armed white men already assembled at the registrar's office.

When no blacks tried to register to vote, Martin, according to his April 3, 1896 newspaper interview, "...Thought I would go around and talk in a friendly way to some of the Negroes and explain to them the wish of the good thinking people of this Parish who we were representing. I went to their houses and told them we had no desire to harm them, but this was a white man's country and the white men intended to control his political destiny in the future. All we ask of them was to stay at home, attend to their work and let politics alone. I told them that the men who were urging them to register and vote were not their best friend and were only using them to get into office, not caring how much trouble they got into afterward. I told them plainly that we looked upon them as the inferior race and we were opposed to both political and social equality, that the white republicans and populists were as much opposed to social equality as we were and only advocated social equality because they needed their vote to ride them into office. The Negroes took my advice in good spirit and assured me that they recognized the force of my argument and were perfectly willing to let the white people settle the election among themselves."

Days later, the white men met and decided to confront Stelly. The white supremacist league wanted to make an example of Stelly to discourage other blacks.

More than one hundred strong, Martin's militia rode to Stelly's farm. According to oral history, Stelly was a crack shot. And, though he was killed, Martin's militia paid a price. At least two wagonloads of militia members were hauled off when the shooting ended.

Julien Stelly was buried, but on white supremacist league orders his body was moved from the cemetery to an unmarked grave. Stelly's property holdings were sold to whites there in Port Barre. (Source: The Opelousas Courier (April 4, 1896), now called The Daily World, reprinted in "Not Then, Not Now, Not Ever" by James A. Stelly (1996)).





DISHing It Up Hot!

Democracy Compromised

By Dot


The most basic right of citizens in a democracy is the right to vote. One man, one vote is the highest standard. While considered the world's foremost democracy, the USA does not come close to this standard. In establishing a slave republic, its founders discarded the equality explicit in a democracy, since these white men believed themselves superior to others.

Cleverly, the word "slavery" does not appear in the US Constitution until the Thirteenth Amendment, which abolished it. Yet, neither this nor subsequent amendments specifically repealed sections of the constitution that made economic and political slavery cornerstones of the republic. As testaments to their longevity, there are the US Senate and Electoral College.

These institutions are products of the Great or Three-Fifths Compromise of Article 1 Section 2. This unholy agreement between the constitutional convention delegates from slave-free and small-large states classified persons and established their relative value for representation and taxation purposes. Had the Thirteenth Amendment truly abolished slavery, it would have specifically repealed Article 1 Section 2. The Senate would be structured to provide proportional representation and there would be no Electoral College.

As currently structured, the vote of a Senator from a small state, primarily red ones, carries the same weight as Senators representing populations far greater. States with relatively small populations can effectively control the Senate. Likewise, these small states can determine where tax dollars are spent and who gets elected president via the Electoral College system. More than compromised democracy, it is hypocrisy.





Hood Notes

Missing the Point

By John Burl Smith

The disparate treatment accorded Deadria Farmer-Paellmann and her husband, a white German, reflects life in the US. This couple went shopping; each made credit card purchases. She had to produce a picture ID and provide her address; his purchases were rung up, no questions asked. Mrs. Farmer-Paellmann, 36, a researcher and mother, spent five years archiving evidence that proves Corporate America benefited from slavery. Her point is that the vestiges of slavery and its impact on blacks did not disappear with the end of the Civil War and the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments.

Taking her point further, since there was no adjustment period that allowed blacks to reverse the mind-set that was beaten and bred into them during slavery, psychological slavery continued. Moreover, since whites did not voluntarily end slavery, they did not change their belief that blacks deserved less than whites. Whites legalized this lesser status in laws, reinforced it economically and socialized it with discrimination. Regardless of emancipation, the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments, whites forced blacks to endure a second-class status. Consequently, blacks never recovered from the more than three hundred years of legal slavery nor the one hundred plus years of psychological slavery.

Government (federal and state), corporations and individual whites steadfastly refused to accept any change that allowed blacks unfettered competition with whites. They ignored the fact that free black labor generated wealth for whites, their heirs and the government through taxation. After emancipation, blacks still were not allowed to fully participate in free enterprise. Lawsuits have shown repeatedly that blacks continued to live and work in a hostile US environment. It cannot be shown discrimination, disparate treatment and inequality ended for blacks.

Farmer-Paellmann's experiment and Dot M. Smith's research document that the 3/5 Compromise prevents blacks from closing the wealth gap. Exposing Aetna in 2000, Farmer-Paellmann showed it insured slaves and made slave owners beneficiaries. She identified 60 companies that profited from slavery. Because they continue to benefit today, whites refused to admit responsibility for the vestiges of slavery. "Sins of their fathers," the wealth they enjoy was derived through kidnapping, enslavement and murder.

This point is missed because many US newspaper companies today own Antebellum-era newspapers that profited from slavery. They ran ads that promised reward money for capturing and returning runaway slaves, offered slaves for sale or sought slaves for purchase. Most notably the Public Opinion which became The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Cox media group, The Sun, today The Baltimore Sun, owned by Tribune Co., The Georgia Telegraph, today Knight Ridder's The Macon Telegraph, The Memphis Daily Appeal, forerunner of E.W. Scripps' The Commercial Appeal, The Daily Dispatch, Media General's Richmond Times-Dispatch; The Daily Picayune, today The Times-Picayune, Advance Publications. Even USA Today, Gannett, owns newspapers that carried slave ads: The Montgomery Daily Advertiser, now The Montgomery (Ala.) Advertiser; and The Louisville Daily Journal, today The Courier-Journal of Louisville.

These newspapers not only supported slavery but segregation and every law, social custom and lynching that maintained the second-class status of blacks. They, like individual whites, deny any responsibility for the heritage and privilege they helped create and are beneficiaries of today.



Disgruntled says: Johnnie Cochran, one of the most brilliant legal minds of our times, recently died. He had a brain tumor. Rumor claims Cochran could have been murdered to prevent him from using his legal prowess to successfully argue cases for slavery reparations. Since the cause of his death was a brain tumor, there are other possibilities besides some nefarious person or organization eliminating him by somehow causing a tumor. At age 67, Cochran was a dapper dresser. Cognizant of his appearance, there was not a single gray hair in his head, at least none was apparent during his public appearances. In fact, his hair appeared uncommonly black. A busy man, he probably used a cell phone religiously. Looking with intelligent eyes on Cochran's lifestyle, one must surely realize hair dyes and cell phones used excessively form a lethal brain combination.



Disgruntled feels: Underprivileged!  A white man, Professor Tim Wise, an anti-racist activist whose work can be read online at www.timwise.org, wrote the best essay I have ever read on white privilege.  Once we acknowledge that there are certain privileges tied to white skin, we can begin to see that non-whites are relatively underprivileged. In the case of blacks that underprivileged or deprived status extends back to slavery, and it created a gap in black socioeconomic and political welfare relative to whites. That gap still exists today, and no amount of denial will make it go away.


Disgruntled wants to know: With the sensational wall-to-wall coverage given each non-story, evidence that big corporate advertisers control the news media grows.  Sure Terri Schiavo's slow demise and the Pope's passage warranted some news coverage. But, 24-7 was overkill. While the airtime and newsprint are devoted to these events, other news receive no or insufficient coverage. Great examples are the pending financial crisis and the recent school shooting. The young shooter was taking the psycho-drug Prozac. You can bet big pharma did not want you to know that. To protect its big money advertisers, the media will not ask, is there a connection between these murderous rages and this class of mind-altering drugs?

 

 



Getting the Point

By John Burl Smith

Washington Times reporter Walter Williams (6-14-2001) wrote, "Slavery was an abomination. There's no argument, based on morality, that can justify slavery and its attendant evils. Indeed, were it possible, slave traders and slave owners should be forced to make reparations to those whom they enslaved." Williams argues that "reparations" for the "vestiges of slavery" is simply nonsense."

The point of reparations for slave descendants is that the wealth that accrued to whites by working blacks for free did not evaporate with slavery. Whites passed those socioeconomic and political benefits on to their children to enjoy. Slaves descendants inherited the lack of wealth of their parents and passed that on to their children as a legacy. Reporter James Cox's research, which examined modern US companies that built their wealth on slavery, proves my point.

Brown Bros, today Brown Bros. Harriman, served as a middleman brokering slave-grown cotton by arranging shipment to mills in New England and Great Britain. New York financiers, James and William Brown's merchant bank grew rich loaning millions to planters, merchants and cotton brokers to buy and sell slaves. When planters or their banks failed, Brown Bros. took possession of their assets. It used its local agents to run repossessed plantations and manage their slaves. Louisiana court records affirm Browns Bros. were slave owners. Claims during the 1840s and '50s from three Concordia Parish cotton plantations with 346 slaves each named Brown Bros in court proceedings.

Shortly after arriving in the US from Germany, Lehman Bros.' founder, Henry Lehman along with his brothers, Mayer and Emanuel moved to Alabama. Middlemen, like the Brown brothers, they stored, bought and sold cotton to brokers or banks in New York and Liverpool, England. Mayer Lehman is listed as the owner of seven slaves -- three males and four females, including a 14-year-old slave girl named Martha. More than owning slaves, the Lehman brothers worked for the Southern cause during the Civil War, according to family historians. Leaving the South after the war, they became commodity traders in New York. Lehman Bros. took a seat on the New York Stock Exchange in 1887.

North America's four major rail networks -- Norfolk Southern, CSX, Union Pacific and Canadian National built their wealth on the backs of black slaves. Like newspapers, nearly every rail line built east of the Mississippi River and south of the Mason-Dixon line before the Civil War was constructed and/or operated with slave labor. Ted Kornweibel, a professor of African studies at San Diego State University, has documented 94 early rail lines that fall into this category. By his count, 39 now belong to Norfolk Southern of Norfolk, VA; 36 are owned by CSX of Jacksonville, FL; 12 belong to Union Pacific, Omaha, NE and seven belong to Canadian National of Montreal. Corporate records show these railroads bought slaves or leased them from their owners. Enslaved workers frequently appeared in annual reports as line-item expenses, referred to variously as "hands," "colored hands," "Negro hires," "Negro property" and "slaves."

There is no doubt that families and stockholders of Brown Bros. Harriman, Lehman Bros., Norfolk Southern, CSX, Union Pacific and Canadian National enjoy wealth today built on the backs of slaves. Moreover, those slaves' descendants do not enjoy the same wealth as they do today. Whites refuse get the point of reparations because they are still benefiting from the vestiges slavery today.

 

|| 2005 Issues || The DISH ||