Articles on the FBI and its role in the Civil Rights Movement, the Black Panther Party, and Ferguson

The FBI’s War on Civil Rights Leaders

http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-fbis-war-on-civil-rights-leaders

 

The FBI and the Civil Rights Movement during the Kennedy Years–from the Freedom Rides to Albany

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2209399?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

 

Why We Should Teach About the FBI’s War on the Civil Rights Movement

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/03/01/why-we-should-teach-about-fbis-war-civil-rights-movement

 

The Dark Side of “I Have a Dream”: The FBI’s War on Martin Luther King

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/08/j-edgar-hoover-war-martin-luther-king/

 

The FBI vs. Martin Luther King: Inside J. Edgar Hoover’s “Suicide Letter” to Civil Rights Leader

https://www.democracynow.org/2014/11/18/the_fbi_vs_martin_luther_king

 

COINTELPRO

http://www.pbs.org/hueypnewton/actions/actions_cointelpro.html

 

The FBI COINTELPRO Program and the Fred Hampton Assassination

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/g-flint-taylor/the-fbi-cointelpro-progra_b_4375527.html

 

COINTELPRO: Teaching the FBI’s War on the Black Freedom Movement

https://www.rethinkingschools.org/articles/cointelpro-teaching-the-fbi-s-war-on-the-black-freedom-movement

 

Freedom Rider: No Tears for the FBI

https://www.blackagendareport.com/no_tears_for_fbi

 

“Black People Need Encryption,” No Matter What Happens in the Apple-FBI Feud

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/black-lives-matter-apple-fbi-encryption/

 

Digital Resources: Federal Response to Radicalism in the 1960s

http://libguides.princeton.edu/c.php?g=84056&p=541928

 

Hoover and the FBI

http://www.pbs.org/hueypnewton/people/people_hoover.html

 

F.B.I. Memos on the Black Panther Party

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/14/us/document-NYTimes10132016.html?_r=0

MLK Enemy of the State (3:40) Mumia Abu-Jamal

http://www.prisonradio.org/media/audio/mumia/mlk-enemy-state-340-mumia-abu-jamal

 

FBI Director Comey: ‘Ferguson Effect’ Causing Murder Spike

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/FBI-james-comey-ferguson-effect-murder/2016/05/12/id/728510/

 

Here’s Why the ‘Ferguson Effect’ Is Total BS

http://www.complex.com/life/2016/05/ferguson-effect-debunked

 

FBI chief again says Ferguson having chilling effect on law enforcement

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/fbi-chief-again-says-ferguson-having-chilling-effect-on-law-enforcement/2015/10/26/c51011d4-7c2c-11e5-afce-2afd1d3eb896_story.html?utm_term=.0839c04cb623

 

Justice Department Announces Findings of Two Civil Rights Investigations in Ferguson, Missouri

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-findings-two-civil-rights-investigations-ferguson-missouri

 GOP senator disinvited from speaking at historically black university

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/12/politics/texas-southern-cornyn-cancel/index.html

John Cornyn Takes Himself Out of Running to Lead the F.B.I.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/politics/john-cornyn-fbi.html

GOP Sen. John Cornyn says racial tensions are merely ‘phony narratives’

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/3/20/1370235/-GOP-Sen-John-Cornyn-says-racial-tensions-are-merely-phony-narratives

What The Oklahoma Congressman Who Just Announced A Senate Campaign Thinks About LGBT Americans

https://thinkprogress.org/what-the-oklahoma-congressman-who-just-announced-a-senate-campaign-thinks-about-lgbt-americans-fcf71ea38f20

10 frightening facts about Tom Cotton

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/14/10_frightening_facts_about_tom_cotton_partner/

Kamala Harris, a ‘Top Cop’ in the Era of Black Lives Matter

 

 

 

Advertisements

The Souls of White Folk by W.E.B. Du Bois

1953580

High in the tower, where I sit above the loud complaining of the human sea, I know many souls that toss and whirl and pass, but none there are that intrigue me more than the Souls of White Folk.

Of them I am singularly clairvoyant. I see in and through them. I view them from unusual points of vantage. Not as a foreigner do I come, for I am native, not foreign, bone of their thought and flesh of their language. Mine is not the knowledge of the traveler or the colonial composite of dear memories, words and wonder. Nor yet is my knowledge that which servants have of masters, or mass of class, or capitalist of artisan. Rather I see these souls undressed and from the back and side. I see the working of their entrails. I know their thoughts and they know that I know. This knowledge makes them now embarrassed, now furious. They deny my right to live and be and call me misbirth! My word is to them mere bitterness and my soul, pessimism. And yet as they preach and strut and shout and threaten, crouching as they clutch at rags of facts and fancies to hide their nakedness, they go twisting, flying by my tired eyes and I see them ever stripped,—ugly, human.

The discovery of personal whiteness among the world’s peoples is a very modern thing,—a nineteenth and twentieth century matter, indeed. The ancient world would have laughed at such a distinction. The Middle Age regarded skin color with mild curiosity; and even up into the eighteenth century we were hammering our national manikins into one, great, Universal Man, with fine frenzy which ignored color and race even more than birth. Today we have changed all that, and the world in a sudden, emotional conversion has discovered that it is white and by that token, wonderful!

This assumption that of all the hues of God whiteness alone is inherently and obviously better than brownness or tan leads to curious acts; even the sweeter souls of the dominant world as they discourse with me on weather, weal, and woe are continually playing above their actual words an obligato of tune and tone, saying:

“My poor, un-white thing! Weep not nor rage. I know, too well, that the curse of God lies heavy on you. Why? That is not for me to say, but be brave! Do your work in your lowly sphere, praying the good Lord that into heaven above, where all is love, you may, one day, be born—white!”

“But what on earth is whiteness that one should so desire it?” Then always, somehow, some way, silently but clearly, I am given to understand that whiteness is the ownership of the earth forever and ever, Amen!

Now what is the effect on a man or a nation when it comes passionately to believe such an extraordinary dictum as this? That nations are coming to believe it is manifest daily. Wave on wave, each with increasing virulence, is dashing this new religion of whiteness on the shores of our time. Its first effects are funny: the strut of the Southerner, the arrogance of the Englishman amuck, the whoop of the hoodlum who vicariously leads your mob. Next it appears dampening generous enthusiasm in what we once counted glorious; to free the slave is discovered to be tolerable only in so far as it freed his master! Do we sense somnolent writhings in black Africa or angry groans in India or triumphant banzais in Japan? “To your tents, O Israel!” These nations are not white!

After the more comic manifestations and the chilling of generous enthusiasm come subtler, darker deeds. Everything considered, the title to the universe claimed by White Folk is faulty. It ought, at least, to look plausible. How easy, then, by emphasis and omission to make children believe that every great soul the world ever saw was a white man’s soul; that every great thought the world ever knew was a white man’s thought; that every great deed the world ever did was a white man’s deed; that every great dream the world ever sang was a white man’s dream. In fine, that if from the world were dropped everything that could not fairly be attributed to White Folk, the world would, if anything, be even greater, truer, better than now. And if all this be a lie, is it not a lie in a great cause?

Here it is that the comedy verges to tragedy. The first minor note is struck, all unconsciously, by those worthy souls in whom consciousness of high descent brings burning desire to spread the gift abroad,—the obligation of nobility to the ignoble. Such sense of duty assumes two things: a real possession of the heritage and its frank appreciation by the humble-born. So long, then, as humble black folk, voluble with thanks, receive barrels of old clothes from lordly and generous whites, there is much mental peace and moral satisfaction. But when the black man begins to dispute the white man’s title to certain alleged bequests of the Fathers in wage and position, authority and training; and when his attitude toward charity is sullen anger rather than humble jollity; when he insists on his human right to swagger and swear and waste,—then the spell is suddenly broken and the philanthropist is ready to believe that Negroes are impudent, that the South is right, and that Japan wants to fight America.

After this the descent to Hell is easy. On the pale, white faces which the great billows whirl upward to my tower I see again and again, often and still more often, a writing of human hatred, a deep and passionate hatred, vast by the very vagueness of its expressions. Down through the green waters, on the bottom of the world, where men move to and fro, I have seen a man—an educated gentleman—grow livid with anger because a little, silent, black woman was sitting by herself in a Pullman car. He was a white man. I have seen a great, grown man curse a little child, who had wandered into the wrong waiting-room, searching for its mother: “Here, you damned black—” He was white. In Central Park I have seen the upper lip of a quiet, peaceful man curl back in a tigerish snarl of rage because black folk rode by in a motor car. He was a white man. We have seen, you and I, city after city drunk and furious with ungovernable lust of blood; mad with murder, destroying, killing, and cursing; torturing human victims because somebody accused of crime happened to be of the same color as the mob’s innocent victims and because that color was not white! We have seen,—Merciful God! in these wild days and in the name of Civilization, Justice, and Motherhood,—what have we not seen, right here in America, of orgy, cruelty, barbarism, and murder done to men and women of Negro descent.

Up through the foam of green and weltering waters wells this great mass of hatred, in wilder, fiercer violence, until I look down and know that today to the millions of my people no misfortune could happen,—of death and pestilence, failure and defeat—that would not make the hearts of millions of their fellows beat with fierce, vindictive joy! Do you doubt it? Ask your own soul what it would say if the next census were to report that half of black America was dead and the other half dying.

Unfortunate? Unfortunate. But where is the misfortune? Mine? Am I, in my blackness, the sole sufferer? I suffer. And yet, somehow, above the suffering, above the shackled anger that beats the bars, above the hurt that crazes there surges in me a vast pity,—pity for a people imprisoned and enthralled, hampered and made miserable for such a cause, for such a phantasy!

Conceive this nation, of all human peoples, engaged in a crusade to make the “World Safe for Democracy”! Can you imagine the United States protesting against Turkish atrocities in Armenia, while the Turks are silent about mobs in Chicago and St. Louis; what is Louvain compared with Memphis, Waco, Washington, Dyersburg, and Estill Springs? In short, what is the black man but America’s Belgium, and how could America condemn in Germany that which she commits, just as brutally, within her own borders?

A true and worthy ideal frees and uplifts a people; a false ideal imprisons and lowers. Say to men, earnestly and repeatedly: “Honesty is best, knowledge is power; do unto others as you would be done by.” Say this and act it and the nation must move toward it, if not to it. But say to a people: “The one virtue is to be white,” and the people rush to the inevitable conclusion, “Kill the ‘nigger’!”

Is not this the record of present America? Is not this its headlong progress? Are we not coming more and more, day by day, to making the statement “I am white,” the one fundamental tenet of our practical morality? Only when this basic, iron rule is involved is our defense of right nation-wide and prompt. Murder may swagger, theft may rule and prostitution may flourish and the nation gives but spasmodic, intermittent and lukewarm attention. But let the murderer be black or the thief brown or the violator of womanhood have a drop of Negro blood, and the righteousness of the indignation sweeps the world. Nor would this fact make the indignation less justifiable did not we all know that it was blackness that was condemned and not crime.

In the awful cataclysm of World War, where from beating, slandering, and murdering us the white world turned temporarily aside to kill each other, we of the Darker Peoples looked on in mild amaze.

Among some of us, I doubt not, this sudden descent of Europe into hell brought unbounded surprise; to others, over wide area, it brought the Schaden Freude of the bitterly hurt; but most of us, I judge, looked on silently and sorrowfully, in sober thought, seeing sadly the prophecy of our own souls.

Here is a civilization that has boasted much. Neither Roman nor Arab, Greek nor Egyptian, Persian nor Mongol ever took himself and his own perfectness with such disconcerting seriousness as the modern white man. We whose shame, humiliation, and deep insult his aggrandizement so often involved were never deceived. We looked at him clearly, with world-old eyes, and saw simply a human thing, weak and pitiable and cruel, even as we are and were.

These super-men and world-mastering demi-gods listened, however, to no low tongues of ours, even when we pointed silently to their feet of clay. Perhaps we, as folk of simpler soul and more primitive type, have been most struck in the welter of recent years by the utter failure of white religion. We have curled our lips in something like contempt as we have witnessed glib apology and weary explanation. Nothing of the sort deceived us. A nation’s religion is its life, and as such white Christianity is a miserable failure.

Nor would we be unfair in this criticism: We know that we, too, have failed, as you have, and have rejected many a Buddha, even as you have denied Christ; but we acknowledge our human frailty, while you, claiming super-humanity, scoff endlessly at our shortcomings.

The number of white individuals who are practising with even reasonable approximation the democracy and unselfishness of Jesus Christ is so small and unimportant as to be fit subject for jest in Sunday supplements and in her foreign mission work the extraordinary self-deception of white religion is epitomized: solemnly the white world sends five million dollars worth of missionary propaganda to Africa each year and in the same twelve months adds twenty-five million dollars worth of the vilest gin manufactured. Peace to the augurs of Rome!

We may, however, grant without argument that religious ideals have always far outrun their very human devotees. Let us, then, turn to more mundane matters of honor and fairness. The world today is trade. The world has turned shopkeeper; history is economic history; living is earning a living. Is it necessary to ask how much of high emprise and honorable conduct has been found here? Something, to be sure. The establishment of world credit systems is built on splendid and realizable faith in fellow-men. But it is, after all, so low and elementary a step that sometimes it looks merely like honor among thieves, for the revelations of highway robbery and low cheating in the business world and in all its great modern centers have raised in the hearts of all true men in our day an exceeding great cry for revolution in our basic methods and conceptions of industry and commerce.

We do not, for a moment, forget the robbery of other times and races when trade was a most uncertain gamble; but was there not a certain honesty and frankness in the evil that argued a saner morality? There are more merchants today, surer deliveries, and wider well-being, but are there not, also, bigger thieves, deeper injustice, and more calloused selfishness in well-being? Be that as it may,—certainly the nicer sense of honor that has risen ever and again in groups of forward-thinking men has been curiously and broadly blunted. Consider our chiefest industry,—fighting. Laboriously the Middle Ages built its rules of fairness—equal armament, equal notice, equal conditions. What do we see today? Machine-guns against assegais; conquest sugared with religion; mutilation and rape masquerading as culture,—all this, with vast applause at the superiority of white over black soldiers!

War is horrible! This the dark world knows to its awful cost. But has it just become horrible, in these last days, when under essentially equal conditions, equal armament, and equal waste of wealth white men are fighting white men, with surgeons and nurses hovering near?

Think of the wars through which we have lived in the last decade: in German Africa, in British Nigeria, in French and Spanish Morocco, in China, in Persia, in the Balkans, in Tripoli, in Mexico, and in a dozen lesser places—were not these horrible, too? Mind you, there were for most of these wars no Red Cross funds.

Behold little Belgium and her pitiable plight, but has the world forgotten Congo? What Belgium now suffers is not half, not even a tenth, of what she has done to black Congo since Stanley’s great dream of 1880. Down the dark forests of inmost Africa sailed this modern Sir Galahad, in the name of “the noble-minded men of several nations,” to introduce commerce and civilization. What came of it? “Rubber and murder, slavery in its worst form,” wrote Glave in 1895.

Harris declares that King Leopold’s régime meant the death of twelve million natives, “but what we who were behind the scenes felt most keenly was the fact that the real catastrophe in the Congo was desolation and murder in the larger sense. The invasion of family life, the ruthless destruction of every social barrier, the shattering of every tribal law, the introduction of criminal practices which struck the chiefs of the people dumb with horror—in a word, a veritable avalanche of filth and immorality overwhelmed the Congo tribes.”

Yet the fields of Belgium laughed, the cities were gay, art and science flourished; the groans that helped to nourish this civilization fell on deaf ears because the world round about was doing the same sort of thing elsewhere on its own account.

As we saw the dead dimly through rifts of battlesmoke and heard faintly the cursings and accusations of blood brothers, we darker men said: This is not Europe gone mad; this is not aberration nor insanity; this is Europe; this seeming Terrible is the real soul of white culture—back of all culture,—stripped and visible today. This is where the world has arrived,—these dark and awful depths and not the shining and ineffable heights of which it boasted. Here is whither the might and energy of modern humanity has really gone.

But may not the world cry back at us and ask: “What better thing have you to show? What have you done or would do better than this if you had today the world rule? Paint with all riot of hateful colors the thin skin of European culture,—is it not better than any culture that arose in Africa or Asia?”

It is. Of this there is no doubt and never has been; but why is it better? Is it better because Europeans are better, nobler, greater, and more gifted than other folk? It is not. Europe has never produced and never will in our day bring forth a single human soul who cannot be matched and over-matched in every line of human endeavor by Asia and Africa. Run the gamut, if you will, and let us have the Europeans who in sober truth over-match Nefertari, Mohammed, Rameses and Askia, Confucius, Buddha, and Jesus Christ. If we could scan the calendar of thousands of lesser men, in like comparison, the result would be the same; but we cannot do this because of the deliberately educated ignorance of white schools by which they remember Napoleon and forget Sonni Ali.

The greatness of Europe has lain in the width of the stage on which she has played her part, the strength of the foundations on which she has builded, and a natural, human ability no whit greater (if as great) than that of other days and races. In other words, the deeper reasons for the triumph of European civilization lie quite outside and beyond Europe,—back in the universal struggles of all mankind.

Why, then, is Europe great? Because of the foundations which the mighty past have furnished her to build upon: the iron trade of ancient, black Africa, the religion and empire-building of yellow Asia, the art and science of the “dago” Mediterranean shore, east, south, and west, as well as north. And where she has builded securely upon this great past and learned from it she has gone forward to greater and more splendid human triumph; but where she has ignored this past and forgotten and sneered at it, she has shown the cloven hoof of poor, crucified humanity,—she has played, like other empires gone, the world fool!

If, then, European triumphs in culture have been greater, so, too, may her failures have been greater. How great a failure and a failure in what does the World War betoken? Was it national jealousy of the sort of the seventeenth century? But Europe has done more to break down national barriers than any preceding culture. Was it fear of the balance of power in Europe? Hardly, save in the half-Asiatic problems of the Balkans. What, then, does Hauptmann mean when he says: “Our jealous enemies forged an iron ring about our breasts and we knew our breasts had to expand,—that we had to split asunder this ring or else we had to cease breathing. But Germany will not cease to breathe and so it came to pass that the iron ring was forced apart.”

Whither is this expansion? What is that breath of life, thought to be so indispensable to a great European nation? Manifestly it is expansion overseas; it is colonial aggrandizement which explains, and alone adequately explains, the World War. How many of us today fully realize the current theory of colonial expansion, of the relation of Europe which is white, to the world which is black and brown and yellow? Bluntly put, that theory is this: It is the duty of white Europe to divide up the darker world and administer it for Europe’s good.

This Europe has largely done. The European world is using black and brown men for all the uses which men know. Slowly but surely white culture is evolving the theory that “darkies” are born beasts of burden for white folk. It were silly to think otherwise, cries the cultured world, with stronger and shriller accord. The supporting arguments grow and twist themselves in the mouths of merchant, scientist, soldier, traveler, writer, and missionary: Darker peoples are dark in mind as well as in body; of dark, uncertain, and imperfect descent; of frailer, cheaper stuff; they are cowards in the face of mausers and maxims; they have no feelings, aspirations, and loves; they are fools, illogical idiots,—”half-devil and half-child.”

Such as they are civilization must, naturally, raise them, but soberly and in limited ways. They are not simply dark white men. They are not “men” in the sense that Europeans are men. To the very limited extent of their shallow capacities lift them to be useful to whites, to raise cotton, gather rubber, fetch ivory, dig diamonds,—and let them be paid what men think they are worth—white men who know them to be well-nigh worthless.

Such degrading of men by men is as old as mankind and the invention of no one race or people. Ever have men striven to conceive of their victims as different from the victors, endlessly different, in soul and blood, strength and cunning, race and lineage. It has been left, however, to Europe and to modern days to discover the eternal world-wide mark of meanness,—color!

Such is the silent revolution that has gripped modern European culture in the later nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Its zenith came in Boxer times: White supremacy was all but world-wide, Africa was dead, India conquered, Japan isolated, and China prostrate, while white America whetted her sword for mongrel Mexico and mulatto South America, lynching her own Negroes the while. Temporary halt in this program was made by little Japan and the white world immediately sensed the peril of such “yellow” presumption! What sort of a world would this be if yellow men must be treated “white”? Immediately the eventual overthrow of Japan became a subject of deep thought and intrigue, from St. Petersburg to San Francisco, from the Key of Heaven to the Little Brother of the Poor.

The using of men for the benefit of masters is no new invention of modern Europe. It is quite as old as the world. But Europe proposed to apply it on a scale and with an elaborateness of detail of which no former world ever dreamed. The imperial width of the thing,—the heaven-defying audacity—makes its modern newness.

The scheme of Europe was no sudden invention, but a way out of long-pressing difficulties. It is plain to modern white civilization that the subjection of the white working classes cannot much longer be maintained. Education, political power, and increased knowledge of the technique and meaning of the industrial process are destined to make a more and more equitable distribution of wealth in the near future. The day of the very rich is drawing to a close, so far as individual white nations are concerned. But there is a loophole. There is a chance for exploitation on an immense scale for inordinate profit, not simply to the very rich, but to the middle class and to the laborers. This chance lies in the exploitation of darker peoples. It is here that the golden hand beckons. Here are no labor unions or votes or questioning onlookers or inconvenient consciences. These men may be used down to the very bone, and shot and maimed in “punitive” expeditions when they revolt. In these dark lands “industrial development” may repeat in exaggerated form every horror of the industrial history of Europe, from slavery and rape to disease and maiming, with only one test of success,—dividends!

This theory of human culture and its aims has worked itself through warp and woof of our daily thought with a thoroughness that few realize. Everything great, good, efficient, fair, and honorable is “white”; everything mean, bad, blundering, cheating, and dishonorable is “yellow”; a bad taste is “brown”; and the devil is “black.” The changes of this theme are continually rung in picture and story, in newspaper heading and moving-picture, in sermon and school book, until, of course, the King can do no wrong,—a White Man is always right and a Black Man has no rights which a white man is bound to respect.

There must come the necessary despisings and hatreds of these savage half-men, this unclean canaille of the world—these dogs of men. All through the world this gospel is preaching. It has its literature, it has its secret propaganda and above all—it pays!

There’s the rub,—it pays. Rubber, ivory, and palm-oil; tea, coffee, and cocoa; bananas, oranges, and other fruit; cotton, gold, and copper—they, and a hundred other things which dark and sweating bodies hand up to the white world from pits of slime, pay and pay well, but of all that the world gets the black world gets only the pittance that the white world throws it disdainfully.

Small wonder, then, that in the practical world of things-that-be there is jealousy and strife for the possession of the labor of dark millions, for the right to bleed and exploit the colonies of the world where this golden stream may be had, not always for the asking, but surely for the whipping and shooting. It was this competition for the labor of yellow, brown, and black folks that was the cause of the World War. Other causes have been glibly given and other contributing causes there doubtless were, but they were subsidiary and subordinate to this vast quest of the dark world’s wealth and toil.

Colonies, we call them, these places where “niggers” are cheap and  name=”the earth is rich; they are those outlands where like a swarm of hungry locusts white masters may settle to be served as kings, wield the lash of slave-drivers, rape girls and wives, grow as rich as Croesus and send homeward a golden stream. They belt the earth, these places, but they cluster in the tropics, with its darkened peoples: in Hong Kong and Anam, in Borneo and Rhodesia, in Sierra Leone and Nigeria, in Panama and Havana—these are the El Dorados toward which the world powers stretch itching palms.

Germany, at last one and united and secure on land, looked across the seas and seeing England with sources of wealth insuring a luxury and power which Germany could not hope to rival by the slower processes of exploiting her own peasants and workingmen, especially with these workers half in revolt, immediately built her navy and entered into a desperate competition for possession of colonies of darker peoples. To South America, to China, to Africa, to Asia Minor, she turned like a hound quivering on the leash, impatient, suspicious, irritable, with blood-shot eyes and dripping fangs, ready for the awful word. England and France crouched watchfully over their bones, growling and wary, but gnawing industriously, while the blood of the dark world whetted their greedy appetites. In the background, shut out from the highway to the seven seas, sat Russia and Austria, snarling and snapping at each other and at the last Mediterranean gate to the El Dorado, where the Sick Man enjoyed bad health, and where millions of serfs in the Balkans, Russia, and Asia offered a feast to greed well-nigh as great as Africa.

The fateful day came. It had to come. The cause of war is preparation for war; and of all that Europe has done in a century there is nothing that has equaled in energy, thought, and time her preparation for wholesale murder. The only adequate cause of this preparation was conquest and conquest, not in Europe, but primarily among the darker peoples of Asia and Africa; conquest, not for assimilation and uplift, but for commerce and degradation. For this, and this mainly, did Europe gird herself at frightful cost for war.

The red day dawned when the tinder was lighted in the Balkans and Austro-Hungary seized a bit which brought her a step nearer to the world’s highway; she seized one bit and poised herself for another. Then came that curious chorus of challenges, those leaping suspicions, raking all causes for distrust and rivalry and hatred, but saying little of the real and greatest cause.

Each nation felt its deep interests involved. But how? Not, surely, in the death of Ferdinand the Warlike; not, surely, in the old, half-forgotten for Alsace-Lorraine; not even in the neutrality of Belgium. No! But in the possession of land overseas, in the right to colonies, the chance to levy endless tribute on the darker world,—on coolies in China, on starving peasants in India, on black savages in Africa, on dying South Sea Islanders, on Indians of the Amazon—all this and nothing more.

Even the broken reed on which we had rested high hopes of eternal peace,—the guild of the laborers—the front of that very important movement for human justice on which we had builded most, even this flew like a straw before the breath of king and kaiser. Indeed, the flying had been foreshadowed when in Germany and America “international” Socialists had all but read yellow and black men out of the kingdom of industrial justice. Subtly had they been bribed, but effectively: Were they not lordly whites and should they not share in the spoils of rape? High wages in the United States and England might be the skilfully manipulated result of slavery in Africa and of peonage in Asia.

With the dog-in-the-manger theory of trade, with the determination to reap inordinate profits and to exploit the weakest to the utmost there came a new imperialism,—the rage for one’s own nation to own the earth or, at least, a large enough portion of it to insure as big profits as the next nation. Where sections could not be owned by one dominant nation there came a policy of “open door,” but the “door” was open to “white people only.” As to the darkest and weakest of peoples there was but one unanimity in Europe,—that which Hen Demberg of the German Colonial Office called the agreement with England to maintain white “prestige” in Africa,—the doctrine of the divine right of white people to steal.

Thus the world market most wildly and desperately sought today is the market where labor is cheapest and most helpless and profit is most abundant. This labor is kept cheap and helpless because the white world despises “darkies.” If one has the temerity to suggest that these workingmen may walk the way of white workingmen and climb by votes and self-assertion and education to the rank of men, he is howled out of court. They cannot do it and if they could, they shall not, for they are the enemies of the white race and the whites shall rule forever and forever and everywhere. Thus the hatred and despising of human beings from whom Europe wishes to extort her luxuries has led to such jealousy and bickering between European nations that they have fallen afoul of each other and have fought like crazed beasts. Such is the fruit of human hatred.

But what of the darker world that watches? Most men belong to this world. With Negro and Negroid, East Indian, Chinese, and Japanese they form two-thirds of the population of the world. A belief in humanity is a belief in colored men. If the uplift of mankind must be done by men, then the destinies of this world will rest ultimately in the hands of darker nations.

What, then, is this dark world thinking? It is thinking that as wild and awful as this shameful war was, it is nothing to compare with that fight for freedom which black and brown and yellow men must and will make unless their oppression and humiliation and insult at the hands of the White World cease. The Dark World is going to submit to its present treatment just as long as it must and not one moment longer.

Let me say this again and emphasize it and leave no room for mistaken meaning: The World War was primarily the jealous and avaricious struggle for the largest share in exploiting darker races. As such it is and must be but the prelude to the armed and indignant protest of these despised and raped peoples. Today Japan is hammering on the door of justice, China is raising her half-manacled hands to knock next, India is writhing for the freedom to knock, Egypt is sullenly muttering, the Negroes of South and West Africa, of the West Indies, and of the United States are just awakening to their shameful slavery. Is, then, this war the end of wars? Can it be the end, so long as sits enthroned, even in the souls of those who cry peace, the despising and robbing of darker peoples? If Europe hugs this delusion, then this is not the end of world war,—it is but the beginning!

We see Europe’s greatest sin precisely where we found Africa’s and Asia’s,—in human hatred, the despising of men; with this difference, however: Europe has the awful lesson of the past before her, has the splendid results of widened areas of tolerance, sympathy, and love among men, and she faces a greater, an infinitely greater, world of men than any preceding civilization ever faced.

It is curious to see America, the United States, looking on herself, first, as a sort of natural peacemaker, then as a moral protagonist in this terrible time. No nation is less fitted for this rôle. For two or more centuries America has marched proudly in the van of human hatred,—making bonfires of human flesh and laughing at them hideously, and making the insulting of millions more than a matter of dislike,—rather a great religion, a world war-cry: Up white, down black; to your tents, O white folk, and world war with black and parti-colored mongrel beasts!

Instead of standing as a great example of the success of democracy and the possibility of human brotherhood America has taken her place as an awful example of its pitfalls and failures, so far as black and brown and yellow peoples are concerned. And this, too, in spite of the fact that there has been no actual failure; the Indian is not dying out, the Japanese and Chinese have not menaced the land, and the experiment of Negro suffrage has resulted in the uplift of twelve million people at a rate probably unparalleled in history. But what of this? America, Land of Democracy, wanted to believe in the failure of democracy so far as darker peoples were concerned. Absolutely without excuse she established a caste system, rushed into preparation for war, and conquered tropical colonies. She stands today shoulder to shoulder with Europe in Europe’s worst sin against civilization. She aspires to sit among the great nations who arbitrate the fate of “lesser breeds without the law” and she is at times heartily ashamed even of the large number of “new” white people whom her democracy has admitted to place and power. Against this surging forward of Irish and German, of Russian Jew, Slav and “dago” her social bars have not availed, but against Negroes she can and does take her unflinching and immovable stand, backed by this new public policy of Europe. She trains her immigrants to this despising of “niggers” from the day of their landing, and they carry and send the news back to the submerged classes in the fatherlands.

All this I see and hear up in my tower, above the thunder of the seven seas. From my narrowed windows I stare into the night that looms beneath the cloud-swept stars. Eastward and westward storms are breaking,—great, ugly whirlwinds of hatred and blood and cruelty. I will not believe them inevitable. I will not believe that all that was must be, that all the shameful drama of the past must be done again today before the sunlight sweeps the silver seas.

If I cry amid this roar of elemental forces, must my cry be in vain, because it is but a cry,—a small and human cry amid Promethean gloom?

Back beyond the world and swept by these wild, white faces of the awful dead, why will this Soul of White Folk,—this modern Prometheus,—hang bound by his own binding, tethered by a fable of the past? I hear his mighty cry reverberating through the world, “I am white!” Well and good, O Prometheus, divine thief! Is not the world wide enough for two colors, for many little shinings of the sun? Why, then, devour your own vitals if I answer even as proudly, “I am black!”

Part I: Finding DuBois: The Study of Racialized Subjects in the Social Sciences

dubois1This essay is excerpted from my dissertation. I have made corrections and changes throughout in order to make it more clear than I feel it was in its original. This is a work in progress and therefore it is evolving and being refined as I revisit and consider my research with new eyes and fresh insight. By publicly sharing my process, I hope to accomplish two things. First, to complete a project that I have put on the back burner for several years, and that I’d like to see completed. And second, to use my blog as a platform for more meaningful engagement and conversation on the issues that I am writing about. I’ve made a deliberate choice to write in the first person because I find it more comfortable, more intimate, and more in tune with the general goals of my project. I use us instead of them where it makes sense for the same reasons.

This essay is divided into five sections. The first section describes the philosophical underpinnings of a Du Boisian framework which I use in the general analysis of racialized subjects. Under section one, I also describe what I mean by a Du Boisian epistemology, and a Du Boisian phenomenology. In the second section, I elaborate upon the description of two important Du Boisian concepts, the veil and double consciousness, which together form the strands of Du Bois’s social theory of race. In the third section, I draw upon the relevant literature on Du Bois in order to develop a model for analyzing communities impacted by reentry. The third section also includes a thematically organized literature review which I deliberately borrowed from the headings used by Du Bois in his study of The Philadelphia Negro. These themes fall under the following five headings: 1) the study of problems 2) the study of race 3) the study of crime 4) the study of communities, and 5) the study of public policy.

These five themes combined form what I mean by a Du Boisian framework. In the fourth section I explain how I applied Du Bois’s framework to the study of communities impacted by reentry. I round out this section with a brief discussion of methods, data, and a statement on the role of the researcher.

Section I: Philosophical Underpinnings of a Du Boisian Framework

Herein, it is useful to understand that Du Bois’s philosophical commitments to the study of racialized subjects and to the question of their humanity in a racist world provide us a context for developing a Du Boisian framework. By attending to the two issues, it is my intention to sketch, in broad terms, the significance of a Du Boisian philosophy as it pertains to the analysis of communities that have been historically dehumanized. I do so in order to make the connection between the way racialized individuals have been treated as problems and the way that communities are imagined and treated as problematic spaces in public policy.

When Du Bois prophetically claimed that the defining problem of the twentieth century was race, he challenged long-held views that the study of racialized subjects was not a worthy endeavor. More importantly, Du Bois’s declaration included an imperative to critically asses and to understand what it means when a society denies the humanity of some human beings because of their skin color. We can better understand how Du Bois challenges the incorrect assumptions about racialized subjects as unimportant and unworthy of studying by considering his epistemological stance on the study of problems.

A Du Boisian Epistemology

In Du Bois’s view how we study a problem has a great deal to do with how we understand that problem, and ultimately with the responses that we develop and implement to deal with the problem. For Du Bois, the reason that Black people are seen as problems is because Black people are denied their humanity. As a result of this dehumanizing perspective/world view the study and analysis of Black life including Black communities is given less weight in the social sciences. Because in America, Blacks have been thought of and treated as something that stands outside of the normal social structure there was no need to study them or to attempt to understand them from a social science perspective. The conventional wisdom was that the study of Black people was best understood through the lens of natural science which had always thought of and treated Black people as sub-human.

Du bois’s epistemology undermined the investment in scientific racism (the system and practice of classifying human beings into discreet races based on phenotypes) as the appropriate lens through which to study Black people. Du Bois did this by showing how racism structures the way that Blacks were thought of as standing outside of human society, and also by asking the question of what it means to be human. This represented an important philosophical shift in the study of racialized subjects because it forced a critical engagement with the existential condition of those individuals that society had chosen to place outside of what it considered “normal.” The othering of Black people in America has had many implications including within academia because the view was that they could only be studied and understood as something other than human. Du Bois thought that the theoretical commitments of scientific racism were incorrect. People are not their problems, and studying them as such meant drawing conclusions that were flawed. A Du Boisian epistemology separates people from their problems and it asserts the humanity of Black people as social beings who have every right to contest their treatment in a racist society. These two moves set up an important philosophical premise for the study of racialized subjects that is further enhanced by a Du Boisian phenomenology.

A Du Boisian Phenomenology

Broadly defined, phenomenology is “the study of structures of consciousness as experienced from the first-person point of view.” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Using this definition, we come to understand that a Du Boisian phenomenology is an approach to the study of Black people that departs with Eurocentric understandings of racialized subjects.

Du Bois was the first to develop a systematic phenomenology based on his reflections of the African self in light of the way racism structured the relationship between Black people and society. Moreover, a Du Boisian phenomenology situates Africa at the center of the study of Black people, as it simultaneously challenges the centrality of European thought as the universal model for knowledge construction.

I draw upon Dr. Monteiro’s observations to illustrate the impact that Du Bois had on the social sciences. He writes,

Rather than a European conceptualization of the African as other and as object, Du Bois does the opposite. His breakthrough, in the end a paradigm shift, accomplished nothing less than laying scientific conditions for studying the Negro and the larger problem of race in the modern world. But this opens the door to the scientific study of humanity as such. He reasoned that by establishing means to study Africans he would eventually lay conditions for a study of humanity. And in doing this, in his own words, as an African (See “On The Souls of Black Folk,” 1904/1996). Hence, a self-conscious, African-centered scientific study of race and the Negro is what he set out to do and in most respects accomplished. this paradigm shift, a revolutionary move in the definition of and practice of knowledge construction, was annexation of the old knowledge construction process and the creation of a synthesis in the Hegelian sense. A new moment in the intellectual history is begun. A real foundation for a human science, which upset the old social science based on notions of European and White supremacy becomes possible. (Monteiro, 2007)

What I take from Monteiro is that a Du Boisian phenomenology is grounded in a philosophical and practical commitment to an African-centered approach for the study of Black people. At the philosophical level Du Bois’s phenomenology asserts, recognizes, and centers Black people’s humanity while on the practical level it provides the emancipatory tools needed to liberate racialized subjects from their marginalized and othered position in racist society that places us outside of the social structure.

Said differently, what Du Bois did was to challenge the notion that Black people were delegitimized subjects and not worthy of study. The logic goes that as delegitimized subjects Black people cannot engage in the study of legitimate questions. Legitimate questions were then and remain to a large extent what White academia determines to be such. A Du Boisian phenomenological approach gives the researcher, and particular the racialized and othered researcher, the theoretical and practical tools needed to engage in the study of “delegitimized” subjects by asserting the researcher’s right as a human being to systematically investigate the problems associated with racialized subjects. In addition to this, the knowledge that said researcher acquires through these investigations can be used to develop strategies for the ultimate emancipation of all racialized subjects.

In the next essay I connect the ways in which Du Bois’s philosophical commitments are useful for the study of communities.

On fighting the good fight and other nonsense about life in higher education and having to reinvent yourself in order to survive

IMG_1894I’m tired! Tired of explaining to folks outside of academia what life in higher ed is like for many people and what it was like for me until I left (read that as “pushed out”). I’m also tired of folks in higher ed trying to convince me that the only way to fight the good fight is to remain in a system that is unresponsive to claims of racism, sexism, and discrimination. I’m also tired of well-meaning folks in higher ed pushing this idea that going into six figure debt is worth it even if you don’t have a snow ball’s chance in hell of a) finding work in your academic field–ever, and that b) reinventing yourself through professional development (which costs money) is worth it because you can apply your skill set to something else. Poppycock!

Allow me to take these things in turn. To my first point, working in entertainment may have been a dream of mine when I was 20, but at 47 it is so far removed from what I have worked for that there are no words. Okay, there are words–many of them. Read on.

But work is work, right? Thankfully I landed in place where a network of people have offered me support and helped me get established. I know I sound ungrateful, but I am not! And let’s be honest–many of us are being forced to reinvent ourselves out of necessity rather than a desire to do so.

I’ve become quite good at shutting down conversations with folks outside of higher ed about my own situation because frankly it’s exhausting, and I don’t owe anyone my time, my good energy or an explanation. A “higher ed is a terrible place right now and I like where I am” is usually enough to satisfy people’s curiosity as I change the subject.

To my second point re: folks in higher ed trying to convince me to return because it’s my responsibility/duty or some such nonsense–I also have words for y’all. Look, I’m thrilled for anyone (especially Black people and people of color) who can navigate these institutions and manage to do so with minimal harm. For me, personally–higher ed is a space that proved to be not only unwelcoming, but aggressively harmful and destructive. Why on earth would you want anyone to remain in that space?

I get that folks want to be encouraging and supportive, but support and respect that not everybody wants to be exposed to harm on a daily basis, and that there’s no balance to strike when you have spent your good energy negotiating that space. Y’all aren’t going to pay folk doctor bills, soothe their tired souls when they need soothing, or provide material support to help folks fight the good fight–especially if that means that the fighting escalates to the level of filing complaints and calling out mutual colleagues who are shitty people. Fighting the good fight happens with the quiet support of close friends, but most folks ain’t about to risk their careers being public and vocal even for people they consider friends. Don’t believe the hype!

Is getting a Ph.D. worth going into six figure debt if you’re not going to get an academic job? I know I’m going to have folks on my shit for this one, but I don’t care. I don’t think anyone should go into six figure debt for a Ph.D. whether you get a job in higher ed or not–that shit should be FREE! Plunging yourself into what is effectively, life long (and intergenerational) debt is a shitty way to launch your career at any age no matter what field/path that you end up in.

Many moons ago I worked in student professional development, and at the time (we’re talking almost 20 years ago now) there was a shift in thinking about how best to prepare graduating students for the job market. Up until the mid-late nineties it was common practice to wait for students to reach their first semester of senior year to begin conversations about future plans, but the new thinking pushed us to begin much earlier (sophomore year). Today, as has been the case for at least ten years–freshman seminars about career planning are common place. There seems to be no such equivalent at the doctoral level because the idea is that your advisor will lay the groundwork for you through collaborations, networking, etc., and still seems to be the preferred approach even if in practice this approach is problematic AF on so many levels.

What do you do if you can’t find work in your field? A) you need to start paying attention to what is happening in higher ed long before you start thinking about where you might land after you defend your dissertation. Understand that tenure is disappearing and that securing a job–especially a multi-year full-time job is going to be extremely difficult. It’s not impossible, but it is difficult. If you’re an outspoken Black woman academic–your choices narrow considerably, but that’s another story for another post. B) don’t wait for your advisor or anyone in your department to tell you this stuff. They won’t! Okay, they might, but it’s highly unlikely so you’re better off doing your own due diligence long before those first student loan payments come due.

Over the last few years we’ve seen a proliferation of services that target already broke and distressed doctoral students that will assist you in figuring out how to move out of academia and into “the real world.” This is really going to piss off some folks, but seriously– since you were smart enough figured out the FAFSA, how to appease 4-5 committee members that your research was worthy, and you managed to survive several semesters teaching courses outside of your field of expertise with perhaps two days notice to prepare–I think–no, I know that you can figure out how to fill out an application for a job you are way overqualified for and you can write a resume for non-academic jobs.

Before I have some of you jump down my throat–I will concede that there is value in getting the support of someone who understands the non-academic job market especially if you have little or no experience looking for a job. There’s also value in sharing experiences, stories, etc., with other people who are similarly positioned. But I’ve seen (and I’m sure you have too) folks jump into the role of coaching who have little or no actual experience either in academic and non-academic job searches. Stay away from these folks. They are only looking to make money off of you because you think you can’t do this. You can!

It’s been more than a year since I have stepped foot on campus and I can honestly say that I don’t miss it. I don’t miss the politics or the harm. I don’t miss feeling exhausted. I do miss engaging with students, but not at the expense of my own well-being and health. While the path that I am on is not the one that expected to be on when I set out pursue a Ph.D., it is where I need to be right now because it has been a space where I’ve been nurtured and where I’ve had the time to heal. The journey continues.

Mother’s Day as a mom with incarcerated adult sons

Mother’s Day has been a difficult holiday for more years than I care to admit. In an effort to ease myself through yet another year of advertisements showing happy families as well as the flood of social media cheer that pushes me offline for several days in May–I am trying something new. So this post is more for my own healing, self-love, self-care and growth than it is for others. If it brings someone else comfort that’s good too, but right now I’m taking Mother’s Day to quite literally mean to be a day for me as a mother.

Full-disclosure–I hate writing these days. Something about having to write a long ass dissertation drained any ounce of joy that I used to get from this process, and my own internal critic (another consequence of grad school) spends entirely too much time worrying about how things fit together rather than just allowing the feelings to flow from my brain and through my fingers onto the page/screen. Yet here I am. Trying and this year that’s where I am. Trying.

More disclosure–writing about things that expose the pain of my life (both past and present) and that may have an impact on the people that I love is difficult. However, I’ve also come to a place in life where my thinking is informed by a generous dose of love-wisdom from women that have taught me that sharing my ups as well as my downs is not only empowering, but a necessary part of the healing process.

I am the mother of two adult incarcerated men, and the pain of that reality squeezes my heart every day, but seems to squeeze harder on Mother’s Day. The babies I carried, gave birth to and raised were not supposed to end up in prison. This was not the plan or the vision, but it is the reality.

Incarceration damages people, and we can all use a little bit more understanding, love and compassion because the current arrangement isn’t working. The isolation and removal of loved ones from family life is painful every day of the year, but holidays are a reminder of what isn’t, what should have been, what won’t be, and your entire heart hurts and breaks into a thousand little pieces until you’re able to regain the strength to gather them back up and press on because that’s what you have to do.

In a country that incarcerates more people than any other industrialized nation, the United States has a problem that extends beyond the physical confines of prisons and reaches into our homes and our lives. I can trace the trajectory from carceral classrooms to prison so clearly that if I wasn’t talking about my own sons it would be easier to discuss as a textbook case or statistic. Fact is it’s all of these things and with my academic background focusing on the subject of mass incarceration in communities it makes it all the more surreal.

I can cite statistics until the cows come home, but right now this is about the stuff we tend to leave out of policy discussions. I hate that my sons are in prison. I hate why they are there. I hate that there is so little that I can do about it and for them except to make their situation a bit more comfortable through commissary payments and letters.

Incarceration imprisons everyone involved, and our current approaches don’t work to address the needs of those inside or of those outside. Even in spaces (activists spaces included) that claim to be supportive of the needs of those with incarcerated loved ones there is a great deal of finger wagging and moralizing that is unhelpful and works to alienate and damage more than it works to heal and strengthen.

Within our own families we may find little comfort or support because everyone has their own baggage to deal with. In families where relationships are already tenuous–incarceration of loved ones only makes bridge building that much more difficult, and in some cases impossible. In this context, holidays are just a pain in the ass and it’s easier to minimize their importance than it is to acknowledge the pain, the rifts, the sorrow of missing those who aren’t there than it is to address these things. It’s also difficult to come together with others who want to blame and treat your incarcerated loved ones as outcasts.

Visiting prison on holidays is no less fraught with emotional baggage. The guilt felt by everyone is palpable, and the rituals associated with prison visits serve as a reminder that you and your loved ones are less than human. But within those booths and over the half-walls of the visiting rooms there is also a great deal of love and joy shared between loved ones. Catching up on each others lives and trading inside jokes for 50 minutes all seems so normal, and for those brief moments when the C.O. isn’t within earshot things are normal–or as normal as they could be given the circumstances.

Not wanting to engage on holidays isn’t weird when you have loved ones in prison–it’s often self-preservation. Because when engaging means subjecting yourself and your incarcerated loved ones to a range of indignities and insults it makes more sense to retreat and chill.

I’m lucky because I have people that love me unconditionally and that understand why brunches, parties, and a great deal of hoopla will not erase the pain, and that pretending that things aren’t the way they are is just an awful way to move through life (albeit an option if it brings you comfort).  I’m lucky as hell to have people who know me well enough to also know that I love celebrations and observing milestones and important events, but not always. Acknowledging the pain, loss and grief is just as important to the healing process as enjoying holidays and celebrations.

Healing is resistance and it’s also a rejection of the death that is incarceration. While nothing will ever be like it was–what will emerge from this thing has to be better. It has to be more loving, more compassionate, more life-giving and affirming. Holidays can be hell, and we need to create space for and accept that for those of us with incarcerated loved ones celebratory moods come and go, but are always difficult. The best we can sometimes do is try. This year I am trying.

 

 

 

 

 

 

12 New Year’s Resolutions for Prison Abolitionists

IMG_6206

Painted discarded book page that was part of a larger art project that I did in 2014.

I compiled the following list after thinking about questions that I get from people that want to know and do more to support the work of prison abolition. The items are not ranked and so the reader should not assume that one thing is more important than the others because they are all important. They all matter!

  1. Find and support abolitionist organizations with your time or money.
  2. Educate others about the PIC.
  3. Donate money, books, or time to organizations that provide in-prison and reentry services.
  4. Find local community resources that offer reentry support and share their information on your social media.
  5. Connect with prison abolitionists in your community and online.
  6. Find out where your local officials stand on issues related to the PIC, and engage them through coordinated action with organizations in your area.
  7. Read books, studies, reports, etc. on issues connected with the PIC including, homelessness, health-care, mental-health, immigration, domestic violence, policing, school-to-prison-pipeline, LGBTQIA, Education, etc. You will find that there are plenty of free materials on these topics and many are available online.
  8. Write to someone in prison. There are a number of organizations that you can connect with that will provide you with information on how to do this.
  9. Listen. There are millions of people that have been to prison, are in prison or are otherwise directly impacted by the PIC. They are best able to tell you what they need, desire, and want. Listen to them.
  10. Learn about intersectionality and apply an intersectional lens to your understanding of the PIC.
  11. Use your talent in ways that reflect your commitment to prison abolition. Share your what you create with others.
  12. Practice self-care.

Choose hope while you work collectively for change.

Happy New Year!