“SOMETHING NEW” ISN’T NECESSARILY SOMETHING GOOD (PART II): WHO ARE THE REAL NEO-MAMMIES?

By Clare X. Brown 

In the previous post I drew attention to some of the practical reasons why “Something New” Isn’t Necessarily Something Good.  In this post I am going to explore an uglier side of this Black Female/ White Male movement in terms of its attempts to denigrate blacks who promote black unity.  Indeed, there are a number of troubling phrases and concepts emanating from this movement.  One of those phrases is the term “neo-mammy” – the concept of… wait for it… a “black nationalist” mammy?!!!  (See http://bfinterracialmarriage.blogspot.com/2008/02/neo-mammies-suicide-bombers-mammie.html )

 …I assume this is a label directed at people like me - whose offence is to attempt to encourage constructive dialogue between black men and black women, and to promote black-on-black love.  The incredible irony is that these “Something New” diehards are the ultimate neo-mammies.  For example, while most of us are aware that the mammy image serves the interests of mainstream white America (Pilgrim 2000), it is also obvious that The Black Female/ White Male Movement similarly serves the interests of mainstream white America by denigrating black men and glorifying white men, as well as encouraging assimilation/ the eradication of blackness.  Additionally, the traditional mammy adored her white family but frequently treated her black family with disdain (Pilgrim 2000) - in the same way, the Black Female/ White Male movement worships white men while treating black men with contempt (e.g. by describing them as being damaged beyond repair).  Moreover, as Pilgrim (2000) notes, the slave mammy did not want freedom since she was too busy serving as a surrogate mother to white families; equally, the “Something New” mammies are serving as mothers to white families, acting as biological mammies to their white-looking children (See Debra Dickerson’s disturbing article, “Don’t Be Black on My Account , 2007) which has strong overtones of biological mammy, almost reminiscent of the wretched Delilah character in the film, ”Imitation of Life”( http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1709148_1709143_1709634,00.html ).  In short, the definition of mammy is someone who panders to the needs of white people – be they white men or white women.  As such, the concept of a “black nationalist” mammy is one of the silliest oxymorons I have come across. 

And now we are on the subject of black nationalists, I find it amusing that I am now being directly and indirectly referred to as a “black nationalist type woman” in an effort to dismiss my point of view.  The truth is that anyone who has the black community’s best interests at heart would acknowledge the value of Black Nationalist theory (despite its weaknesses in contemporary movements).  I have and always will  condemn the misogyny and the hypocrisy of some Black Nationalist males who present a veneer of black consciousness (for those in doubt, read this blog in its entirety).  At the same time, I believe that an individual who sincerely believes in the survival of the black community would NOT use the term black nationalist in a derogatory way.  Be that as it may, if equating me with the less savory aspects of Black Nationalism is a mechanism which allows assimilationist/ denatured black women (or men) to sleep easier at night, so be it.  At the end of the day, black people with integrity know who the real neo-mammies are.

“SOMETHING NEW” ISN’T NECESSARILY SOMETHING GOOD

By Clare X. Brown

Since the release of the film Something New, (featuring a black female/ white male interracial relationship) there has been a major effort in the blogosphere to similarly encourage black women to pursue relationships with white men.  While the film clearly promotes black female interracial relationships, the blogs take this promotion to a whole new level.  Their basic argument is that white men are the answer to all black women’s problems and make it seem as if white men can do no wrong.  I find it all rather cringe worthy.  But in particular, I always wonder whether any of these women ever consider why - in a white supremacist society - would white men choose black women as partners.  Why would people who have historically enslaved another people now want to be in relationships with them?  Why would men who defiled and denigrated black women now consider marrying them? 

 I am sorry but I do not buy the “love is colorblind” nonsense.  We live in a color conscious society and the truth is that color does indeed drive interracial relationships - more than the “Something New” brigade are willing to admit.  Indeed, some of the worst racists out there are those who are in relationships with black people!  Take the case of “Janet” (pseudonym), my Black South African acquaintance, whose white English partner (of thirty years) disliked her bringing black friends to their home.  Even more shocking is the autobiographical essay of a mixed race woman who revealed that her white father referred to her mother and siblings as “niggers” when he was angry.  So no, no, no - having a black girlfriend or wife does not make someone a non-racist! 

Why - I hear you ask - would people who are as racist as this actually seek out a black person?  Why would they go through the hassle of taking a black partner?  I strongly suspect that in many cases “interracially-inclined” men feel particularly comfortable in relationships with “out-group” women who have a lower status in society.  For some, it may be the need to feel special and important in relation to their low status partner; for others, the driving factor is perhaps very low self-esteem in the sense that they simply do not feel secure in relationships with women of their own status (in white supremacist society). 

I also wonder whether the black women who are raving about white men ever stop to reflect on the reality of having a white partner.  Do they ever consider that their partner will in no way appreciate what it means to be black in this society?  Do they realize that he will never truly understand all the crap they have to go through.  Additionally, the white boyfriend/ husband is very likely to expose his black partner to increased racism (through racist family and friends). 

I appreciate that there is a shortage of upper-middle class black men, and understand that some black women prefer interracial dating over dating a “lower-class” brother.  I just hope that those black women who are undecided on this issue will do some serious thinking.

BLACK-ON-BLACK LOYALTY

By Clare X. Brown

Loyalty is something that is very important to me -whether it’s in personal relationships, or in relation to group loyalty.  One of the themes that run through this blog is the need for black people to show more loyalty towards each other.  Let me give three examples which I think illustrate how we as black people could show more loyalty towards each other.

First, black men need to be more loyal to black women.  This is well illustrated by the fact that so many “conscious” black men hero worship Eldridge Cleaver - despite the fact that Eldridge Cleaver absolutely loathed black women. Indeed, Eldridge Cleaver was a good example of a man who proclaimed he was pro black while being open about favoring white women over black women.  He openly acknowledges his rape of both black (and white women) in his book, Soul on Ice: 

I became a rapist. To refine my technique and “modus operandi”, I started out by practicing on black girls in the ghetto–in the black ghetto where dark and vicious deeds appear not as aberrations or deviations from the norm, but as part of the sufficiency of the Evil of the day–and when I considered myself smooth enough, I crossed the tracks and sought out white prey. I did this consciously, deliberately, willfully, methodically–though looking back I see that I was in a frantic, wild, and completely abandoned frame of mind.

 Amin Sharif notes that Cleaver:

 …felt not only inadequate with white women but with black women as well……..he never took full responsibility for raping his “black victims.” Instead, Cleaver strangely made his apology to white society. To them Cleaver made his appeal, We are a very sick country. I, perhaps, am sicker than most.

Despite all the terrible things he did and said, incredibly I still see his image regularly on people’s blogs etc…WHY?

Second, black women need to show more loyalty towards black men.  I find it disconcerting that some black women will spout the “sisterhood is global” rhetoric before they show any solidarity to fellow blacks.  For example, it is fairly obvious - certainly in recent years - that bell hooks targets a progressive white female audience before black folk…maybe the fame has gone to her head – I don’t know – or maybe it’s the money.  Likewise, too many black female bloggers are more interested in writing for blogher.org (a white feminist blog network) than blogging for a black- oriented audience; they seem to be more interested in getting their blogs linked by white progressives than writing anything of substance.  What can I say? It’s sad. 

Third, identifiably black “biracial” people need to show loyalty to the black group.  Yes, it is madness to identify equally with “both sides” when both sides don’t show loyalty to you.  At the end of the day, Black Americans accept black biracial people into the black community - or Black Americans wouldn’t be such a spectrum of different skin tones – however, white people have ALWAYS rejected identifiably Black Biracial people.  To obsessively cling to a mixed or “mulatto” status is just another form of disloyalty to your black brothers and sisters - and it further weakens the black group. 

Ultimately, black folk need to put loyalty to blacks before their loyalty to white groups.  If we did this, we would have more self respect and (for what it’s worth) more respect from others.

WHY WE MUST RESIST ASSIMILATION

By Clare X. Brown 

I believe that in this white supremacist world, there is something about being in close proximity to whites that causes many of us black folk to act completely and utterly against our best interests.  For example, Chinweizu (1994) notes “All you need do is introduce a white face among negrophobic blacks and they become disorganised, they become disoriented…”  In a similar vein, Bobby Wright (1984) pointed out that “everywhere one finds Whites and Blacks in close proximity to each other, the whites are in control” and observed that “Blacks rarely question this extraordinary universal phenomenon which defies every known statistical law of probability.” 

Being close to whites really does seem to have a literal brainwashing effect on certain black folk.  Indeed, I think it’s possible that those black men who put themselves through all kinds of racial indignities and isolation simply in order to marry white women may have been overexposed to white people at some point in their lives (as a child or as an adult).  Similarly this may be what causes their black female counterparts to bend over backwards to justify why white men make wonderful marriage partners (despite all the terrible things white men have done and continue to do to black people).  

And let’s not forget the plight of some blacks in the UK – a country with a small, very fragmented black population, where most blacks are overexposed to whites and white supremacist thinking from birth.  Most UK blacks have to confront the chilling experience of being the lone black in employment and/ or in educational settings and/ or in neighborhoods, and so on.  Indeed, it’s possible to argue that overexposure to whites/ white supremacist thinking, and isolation from other blacks is a factor in the extremely high rates of black schizophrenia in the UK (the highest rate of black schizophrenia in the world). 

Even the messages of seemingly “ultra-conscious” black folk seem to be at risk of being diluted by too much contact with whites.  Take the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal - most of his supporters are white, and this which may be having a deleterious effect on his ideology as he appears to embrace a Marxist (“power-to-the-people philosophy”) rather than an unapologetically “pro-black” ideology.  And what about Malcolm X?  After his famous trip to Mecca, and his interactions with white Arabs, he changed his perspective on black-white relations, which arguably contradicted everything he used to stand for.  Don’t get me wrong - I have tremendous sympathy for the positions of both Mumia and Malcolm X.  In the case of Mumia, the man may be once again fighting a death sentence, and clearly doesn’t have the luxury of picking and choosing his supporters.  In the case of Malcolm X, at the end of his life, he was treated disgustingly by the Nation of Islam, and had nowhere to turn, so it’s hardly surprising that he was willing to collaborate with whites at this time…I am confident that had Malcolm lived he would have revised the opinions he formed before he died (when he was obviously under extreme stress). 

As I hope the above examples have demonstrated, black people need to be cautious about the price they are paying for closeness to whites.  If blacks as a people want any hope of dignity, and indeed survival, we need to embrace black autonomy; if we want to gain self-respect, and respect from others, we must stop running after white people; we must stop being afraid of hurting white people’s feelings; we must stop trying to be so damn “fair” to white people all the time - hell, do white folk generally give a damn about hurting our feelings or being fair to us?  As Frances Cress Welsing (1989) argues “Instead of engaging in our past practices of complaining, moaning, crying, groaning, begging, clapping hands and singing, ‘We Shall Overcome’, black people must analyze our problems and take the necessary steps to eliminate them.  I say that it’s time to redirect the energy we put into connecting with white folk to connecting with each other.  Instead of relocating to predominately white countries like France and Canada, we need to be relocating to majority black countries.  Rather than seeking out majority-white places like Seattle and Portland, we need to be moving to “Chocolate Cities” like Atlanta and DC.  Instead of trying to join white institutions, we need to be supporting and building black institutions.  In preference to buying houses in white neighborhoods, we need to be buying houses in the black community.  We need to work at obtaining employment in settings where we can interact with other black people - even if this means taking a lower salary - and / or consider setting up our own businesses.  We MUST NOT send black children to majority white schools – if necessary, we need to home-school our children.  We need to support, love and marry black people rather than chasing after white ones.  In short, let’s offer ourselves and our children some kind of solidarity - as other minorities do - as any self-respecting people does.

ASSIMILATE IF YOU MUST, BUT PLEASE BE HONEST ABOUT IT!

By Clare X. Brown

I think that black folk who want to assimilate need to be honest about this.  All too often, black folk are assimilating and promoting assimilation but are refusing to be open about what they really stand for.

Why is it so difficult for black people who assimilate to acknowledge that this is what they believe in?  Perhaps it is because they know – at least on a subconscious level - that assimilation is extremely destructive to the black community; they realize (as bell hooks has noted) that assimilation is a “strategy deeply rooted in the ideology of white supremacy.”  On a deep level they may recognize that assimilation is a form of mentacide, that is (in the words of Bobby Wright) the “deliberate and systematic destruction of a group’s minds with the ultimate objective being the extirpation of the group.”

At the same time - whether they want to acknowledge it or not - every black person who affiliates themselves with a white political movement (whether it be conservative or progressive) IS endorsing assimilation.  Black progressives (liberals, socialists, Marxists, feminists etc) are particularly hypocritical, since they act in ways which indicate that they want to assimilate, and advance causes which in effect MEAN assimilation into the white population, but at the same time, they are not honest about what they are doing.   They insist on couching their objectives in other terms.  For example, they talk about “fighting racism”, that is, displays of “in-your-face racism” (because overt racism reminds them that some whites are never going to accept them).  They “promote diversity” (so they can encourage the interracial relationships which many of them appear to crave).  They ridicule Black Nationalism (because they know that by attacking the only ideology which promotes black unity, they will gain white approval).  These “progressive” fools will grovel for any crumbs of recognition that white people give them, and some of them still seem to believe that white people are going to save them despite all evidence to the contrary.

When all is said and done, assimilationist blacks - be they conservatives or progressives - should do what they have to do BUT they need to be open about it.  While it may not be palatable to face up to the fact that assimilation is what they stand for, they need to stop the hypocrisy.  As RED C has noted, these kinds of blacks:

 …think they speak for black people. They think they know best. They are utterly confused and pose a danger to themselves and anyone they encounter who is unaware of their insanity.

My message is simply this: assimilate, if you must, but stop setting yourself up as black “leaders” and sabotaging the black community.  If you have one iota of integrity, move on, and leave the leadership of the black community to those who are truly committed to the upliftment of our people. 

RUMINATIONS ON RACIAL IDENTITY

By Clare X. Brown 

I cannot stand hypocrisy in relation to race matters, and one of the areas that particularly irks me is hypocrisy about racial identity.  It is my firm belief that one’s racial identity comes from one’s physical appearance, and corresponding social identity, rather than our actual “heritage”.  In other words, it doesn’t matter what your parents look like; your racial identity depends on what you look like, and how white supremacist society sees you and treats you.

This hypocrisy about racial identity is particularly strong in relation to mainstream discourse about the biracial experience, which seems to imply that there is this homogeneous group of biracials who all have the same experience.  The truth is the racial identity and racial experiences of biracial people are as diverse as people from “monoracial groups.”  Thus, a “white-looking” biracial person or a “racially ambiguous looking” (non-black) biracial person is going to have a very different experience from a “black-looking” biracial person (like myself).  Accordingly, some biracials have white skin privilege, others have “biracial privileges” (the privilege of being non-black), and others bear the full burden of being black in society, just like their monoracial white, non-black and black counterparts.   For this reason there can be no pretense that there is any standard biracial experience, and I believe that in the main, biracial people have much more in common with the monoracial groups who look like them, and experience what they experience - whether this is privilege or oppression – than other biracials with different racial identities.

It is my opinion that regardless of your ancestry or parentage, if you look “black”, you are black, and you experience all the oppression that goes with being black in a white supremacist world.  Likewise, if you look “white”, you are white, and you enjoy all the privileges that go with being white in a white supremacist world.  I think it would benefit us all if we learned to be more honest about racial identity.

EXPLORING THE DIVISIONS BETWEEN BLACK MEN AND BLACK WOMEN

By Clare X. Brown

 No one can fail to have noticed that there is an ongoing crisis in black male-female relationships that has been going on for some time now.  The divisions between black men and women exist for a number of reasons.  For example, many black men have been condemned for abandoning the black family by marrying outside of the race (due to basing romantic decisions on “white supremacy factors”).  At the same time, black women have tended to be vilified for being overly materialistic in their choosing of partners (due to basing romantic decisions on “financial factors”).  While there is a common perception in the black community that black women are somehow more “pro-black” than black men, they are equally criticized for being unnecessarily judgmental with regard to black men.  Moreover, many black men and black women seem to have the attitude that “black men” or “black women” have “a monopoly on suffering” with regard to living in a white supremacist society. 

On the other hand some would argue that these gender-specific criticisms are a waste of time since neither sex has a monopoly on black consciousness or - to use Haki Madhubuti’s term - being “denatured.” Thus, for every Quincy Jones, there is an Eartha Kitt, for every John McWhorter, there is a Debra Dickerson, for every Colin Powell, there is a Condoleeza Rice.  Additionally it could be argued that neither sex has a monopoly on suffering.  Thus, while black men may complain that they suffer more than black women in terms of employment-based discrimination, black women may consider that they go through more pain than black men in terms of being subject to both interracial colorism (from non-blacks) and intraracial colorism (from their own black men).  A case could also be made that many black women have an equally difficult time in the workplace.  Still others may argue that just as many black men (as black women) have difficulties finding suitable relationships, particularly if they are looking beyond white supremacy factors. 

Do black men have a worse time of it?  Do black women have a worse time of it?  Are black women more “conscious” than black men?  Are black women more judgmental than black men?  I’m interested in hearing your views. 

I do not claim to know all the answers but one thing is absolutely clear: our long term survival as people of African descent will depend on our ability to reject white supremacist ideals, build bridges between black men and women, and ultimately unite as black people. 

THE BLACK EUROPHILES

By Clare X. Brown

Europe is inextricably linked with whiteness for the same reason that Africa is associated with blackness.  As such, I have always wondered why some African Americans choose to go and live in Europe.  For a person of African descent to willingly move to Europe of all places is to me a red flag of monumental proportions.

I could not care less that some famous African American writers such as James Baldwin, Richard Wright and Maya Angelou spent time in Europe.  They are not above criticism.  While Baldwin’s stated reason for moving to Europe was to escape the American racism of the 1950s and 1960s, somehow I doubt this is the whole story.  First, if he simply wanted to escape America, why not join the Black American expatriates who started a new life in Ghana – if he was as pro-black as he had us believe, surely Africa would have been an obvious choice for relocation.  Second, Europe has always been a racist place.  For example, Germany is the natural home of Nazism; in the case of France, the “Front National” (the French Neo-Nazi party) won over 20% of the national vote in 2002; and in the UK, in 2004/5, there were an estimated 179, 000 racially motivated crimes in England and Wales alone.

I have to ask then, whether the real reason for moving to Europe is not simply a yearning to assimilate into whiteness - because as we all know, Europe has always been a place where blacks have been expected to assimilate.  Indeed, as black immigrants to a basically white country, it could be argued that assimilation into the white mainstream is the natural outcome of migration to Europe.

In a previous post, I noted that there may be a link between white-oriented black men and “white areas” of the US.  Similarly I believe that certain black folk (both male and female) premeditatedly choose to live in Europe because in general there are less taboos about interracial relationships and white folk may be more open to interracial relationships.

I think it was Malcolm X who remarked that he never trusted a white European who was enthusiastic about America; well, I could never trust a person of African descent who told me they wanted to go and live in Europe. 

HIDDEN WHITE WIVES

 By RED C (Guest Commentator)

As the weather clears in Chicago, I’ve noticed a trend. It happened last year too. In fact, I first recall the occurrence nearly ten years ago when I lost a childhood friend to this epidemic.

There are a lot of black men with “hidden” white wives in my neighborhood. Familiar territory, you say? I agree. But what really irritates me is the ritual of “pro-blackness” that I hear throughout the seasons as neighbors rake leaves and shovel snow. I always hear about these wives (without any reference to their whiteness) but I never see them. Until it gets hot. Then there are family outings and the “pro-black” men who talk all black at the community meetings and block club events get quiet.

What they never seem to articulate but perhaps sense on an instinctive level is that their credibility as black men is crippled when we see who they have chosen as wives and lovers. As one sister told me, the imagery of a professional black man, who is standing on the shoulders of his ancestors (whether he knows it or not), kneeling to ask trailer park Susie for her hand in marriage is nauseating and insulting.

I’ve seen black women leave a block club BBQ with their daughters in tow because of the white supremacy dominating the conversation since Dr. So-and-So has a white wife. I don’t even have children but I can see how this is damaging to the young women and girls who are observing, growing, and thinking.

I’ve already encountered too many boys and young men in social services who cleave to the imagery where black men fawn over white lies. One client, age 15, noted that “white girls are just easier to get along with.” Now, this person has admitted that he has never met any white people his age but he gets the images from television. But TV ain’t totally to blame; I can look outside my door and find culprits.

Chicago is the “windy city” but not because of the actual climate. The origin of the term came from the constant gabbing (hot air) of crooked politicians. I find that this is an accurate category for the anti-black pro-black* men who contribute to the confusion in our community.

I don’t see any automatic unity or collective action as these older professional/university black men with hidden white wives have an agenda toward assimilation, from my perspective and experience. Whether it is a block club, a PTA meeting, or community policing these men ultimately go the way of buffer negroes.

The buffer zone, as Marcus Garvey stated and Haki Madhubuti elaborated are those negroes who are denatured and serve white masters in return for status, job security, etc. They think they speak for black people. They think they know best. They are utterly confused and pose a danger to themselves and anyone they encounter who is unaware of their insanity.

I am convinced that part of our dilemma as a people is the unaddressed black patriarchy and status striving that serve white supremacy. Not every black male needs saving, especially if they are a parasite in their taking.

*Kudos to Clare for her earlier blogs and her terminology, which I am drawing from here.

Link: RED C’s website

TOP TEN DISHONEST COMMENTS ABOUT RACE

By Clare X. Brown 

The following are some of the most dishonest comments people make about race today.  If you think of more, feel free to add them!  

“I have transcended my blackness.” (I have proved myself to white people – aren’t I wonderful?!! By glorifying myself for transcending blackness, and implicitly pathologizing those who don’t transcend blackness, I am showing my allegiance to the white supremacist system);   

I just “love people” (I can deflect attention away from the fact that I ingratiate myself with white people by declaring that I just love people);

“Race is an artificial construct” (I will state the obvious to distract readers from the real issues; if I can make it seem that you are saying race is biological, I can hide my racism by presenting you as the “real racist”;

 “You have a chip on your shoulder” (If I can make the black person believe there is something wrong with them and not the racist system, I can avert attention away from my personal racism);

 I “don’t see color”; “people are people;”we’re not of the black race, we’re of the human race* (You analyze race too much and that makes me uncomfortable because you draw attention to my color conscious choices – I would like for us to PRETEND NOT TO SEE RACE because then I can be as racist as I like [if I'm white] or I can practice as much black-on-black racism as I like [if I'm black] and you won’t be able to prove it because “I don’t see color”);

The real problem is not race, it’s a class problem. (I can deflect attention from race to class and I can also use black people as pawns to promote socialism rather than to help their own group. Other races can have a cultural identity and unity but blacks can’t – blacks are the only ethnic group that MUST blend in and lose their blackness);

I don’t own slaves and nobody I know owns slaves (I can sidetrack everyone from the way I oppress blacks today by saying it’s a historical issue)*;

Some of my best friends are black. (Normally declared by the person who says I don’t see color)….hmm so how do you know your best friends are black if you don’t see color? Lol*;

I live next door to a black person, I have a black friend, I am dating a black person, I’m sleeping with a black person, I’m married to a black person, I have biracial children, I have transracially adopted children. (Therefore I am a lovely, good, kind white person and CAN NEVER be racist; I am beyond racism).  These types can often be the most aggressive racists of the lot lol;

I don’t care if you are black, purple, blue, green. (Meaning I’m comparing blacks to purple, blue, and green aliens).

 *My acknowledgements go to Change Agent for his help with these suggestions.

THE “GOOD BLACK PERSON” VERSUS THE “BAD BLACK PERSON”

By Clare X. Brown 

In this society as a black person it is your job to make white people feel comfortable around you; not the other way around - even though blacks in a majority white setting have far more need to be put at ease than white folk. Additionally my personal feeling is that white people can only cope with “liking” a few black people (usually one at a time); hence the popular expression, “you’re not like the rest of them” and the term “honorary white”.  Indeed, with regard to their typical reaction to black people, it can sometimes appear that there are “good black people” and “bad black people”!  This situation is illustrated very well in reality TV shows where white people have a tendency to accept one minority and reject another in an almost exaggerated fashion.  Journalist Eric Deggans notes:   

Adept at fitting in among their white counterparts, the assimilated minority blends in, making few waves and earning loads of friends. In contrast, the unassimilated person sticks out like a burr on a silk-covered bed, constantly conflicting with the larger group until they are isolated, demonized and eventually ejected. 

Deggans also points out that the situation in reality TV shows is mirrored in corporate America (also see the following). Deggans draws attention to the research findings of sociologist Elijah Anderson in which Anderson identified “assimilated black executives” and “unassimilated black executives”.  Assimilated black executives felt comfortable around white people, got on well with white people and had white friends.  Conversely unassimilated black executives were never really comfortable around white people, found it difficult to trust them, and tended not to have white friends outside the job.

So what do the assimilated blacks (“good black people”) do in order achieve their honorary white status?  What are the unassimilated blacks (“bad black people”) refusing to do and/ or unable to do that makes them unpopular with white folk?  The answer is simple: assimilated blacks consciously or unconsciously work hard to be accepted by the white group, and in a white supremacist culture they are rewarded accordingly.  First, assimilated blacks just spend a whole lot more time around whites than unassimilated blacks; they tend to prefer being around white people over being around black people, they are likely to have white friends, live in white neighborhoods - and these days they often have white wives and husbands.  Second, assimilated blacks do a lot of smiling  - I’ve often commented on how “important” it is to smile when interacting with white people as they seem to be tense around black people who don’t smile.  On the other hand, unassimilated “bad black people” are generally not smiley enough in their interactions with white folk!  Third, assimilated blacks “prove themselves” to whites/ win them over.  For example, if they can be wonderfully outgoing then they somehow “overcome their blackness” and get honorary white status…although I’m sure that they themselves would prefer terms like “transcending blackness”, I just “love people” and I “don’t see color”! 

Now I am not for one moment pretending that most of us black folk are not forced to “play the game” sometimes.  Most of us at least have to “pretend to assimilate” to a certain extent for our own survival, for example, in order to keep our jobs (unless we are determined enough to work in black organizations, move to majority black countries and or set up our own businesses).   

Ultimately I believe that the key difference between true assimilated blacks and the rest of us is that on a deep level assimilated blacks need to be liked/ loved by whites; they eat, sleep and breathe whiteness. Perhaps most importantly, assimilated “good black people” make it clear explicitly or implicitly that their ultimate loyalty lies with white people. 

BLACK MARXISTS, BLACK NATIONALISTS AND BLACK PANTHERS

 By Clare X. Brown 

I came across an interesting article in ChickenBones Journal which explores the pros and cons of Black Marxists and Black Nationalists.  Author, Junious Ricardo Stanton points out weaknesses in both movements; for example, he acknowledges the homophobia often associated with Nationalists:

The Left is quick to call nationalists homophobic and to a large degree they are correct…

With regard to problems with Marxist/leftist movements, he argues that racism within the left makes it unlikely that the dream of black and white working class uniting together against capitalism will ever be realized:

…black Leftist intellectuals never get any respect or promotion by the white Leftist apparatus unless they are perfectly parroting the Marxist party line….Black Leftists are so obsessed with the class issue they are in total denial about the racism that exists within the Leftist movement itself.

Stanton concludes by suggesting that Black Nationalism has more to offer the black community than Marxism:

At least the Afrocentric community gets props from the conscious black community because they discovered what Marcus Mosiah Garvey intuitively knew, most African people (those not brainwashed by the white right or left) have a yearning to get out from under the yoke of racist dehumanization and subjugation of the Arabs and Europeans. The Afrocentric movement is so powerful it forced not only the ruling elites into an aggressive reactionary posture but also Leftist “intellectuals” as well…

No black Leftist class analysis comes close to touching the psyches of black folks like nationalists writers like Amos Wilson, Jacob Carruthers or Ra Un Nefer Amen. Just as the Leftists correctly point out most Africans in America have no plans to repatriate to Africa, they must be willing to admit most Africans in
America have absolutely no affinity for Marxist ideology whatsoever…

The notion of race and racism are too real and too pervasive and for a black person to believe the class issue supersedes race/color is to blind oneself to the realities of AmeriKKKan life. The Leftist dream of black and white working together based upon their own perceived self interests, while a noble and pragmatic goal, runs counter to the history of most populous movements in this country.

Does anyone agree with Stanton that Nationalism is preferable to Marxism?  Does anyone consider that Marxism is preferable to Nationalism?  Has anyone had experiences in either of these movements?  I’m interested in hearing what readers think.  For the full article, see the following link:

Lets Grow Up and Move On By Junious Ricardo Stanton in ChickenBones Journal 

I’m also intrigued as to whether the Black Panthers are generally perceived by readers as Black Marxists or Black Nationalists.  Certainly, the Wikipedia entry on the Black Panther Party notes: 

….While firmly grounded in black nationalism … the party reconsidered itself as it grew to national prominence…The Black Panthers ultimately condemned black nationalism as “black racism”^[4], and became more focused on socialism without exclusivity….Whereas the Panthers had been founded as an institution interested in social justice for African Americans, Seale attempted to reform it to an institution for worldwide social justice, regardless of the nationality or ethnicity of the oppressed people…

I personally find the concept of the Black Marxist to be problematic.  Indeed, I see him/ her as the quintessential “anti-black pro-black person”.  As has been explored in the previous post, I believe that the true goal of the Black Marxist has never been racial equality; rather the mission of the Black Marxist is to de-racialize black folk, and to gain the acceptance of white folk.  Am I being too judgmental or is this a fair assessment?  I want to hear your views!

THE RISE OF THE “ANTI-BLACK PRO-BLACK” PERSON

 By Clare X. Brown 

There seems to be an ever-increasing number of folk (both white and black) who present a veneer of race-consciousness/ black-consciousness, who are in actuality, wait for it…anti-black! 

So who are the “anti-black pro-black people”?  Well, they tend to be found in “progressive movements”.  For example, the white folk who pretend they are pro-black are often key players in the “race-relations industry”; they may make a living writing about race, although their writing tends to state the obvious and regurgitate topics, and ideas that have been in circulation for the last forty years.  You will see them among the ranks of the “trendy-lefties” who year after year go on their “anti-racist picnics” (with their trans-racially adopted and biracial children in tow)!  Interestingly, these “pro-black” whites never actually achieve ANYTHING in terms of real racial equality for black people.  With regards to their phony black counterparts, these folk also are frequently significant figures in the race-relations industry, and might similarly make a living out of race issues as activists, writers and academics.  Again their writing tends to be monotonous, reiterating “safe” topics, that have already been explored by others.  In other words, they are careful not to write about anything that will rock the boat or offend their white liberal buddies.  Additionally this kind of individual has a tendency to desperately patronize anti-racist events (in order to get as close as possible to “friendly whites”).  These types may also premeditatedly practice intra-racial racism as employers, as public officials, and in their personal relationships, in order to satisfy their addiction to whiteness.  As alluded to above, in the forty or so years following the gains of the civil rights movement, incredibly folk in the progressive movement have achieved NOTHING in terms of racial equality for black folk.  If anything, we as a people have gone backwards.  So why the contradiction? Why is it that groups who seemingly exist to achieve racial equality NEVER appear to get anywhere with regards to realizing this dream?   Well, I believe that the true goal of these groups has never been racial equality; rather the mission of progressive movements is to de-racialize black folk both psychically (by encouraging colorblind ideology) and physically (through miscegenation) in order that a new breed of black people emerge who are less threatening to white folk.  For example, it’s no coincidence that the vast majority of black folk in the progressive movement have white/ non-black partners.  As such, these groups are not about strengthening the black community; their agenda is to weaken it, whether they are aware of this or not. 

Ultimately, it could be argued that whites and blacks in progressive movements are not operating in the best interests of blacks as a people, and it’s important that genuinely conscious black folk are mindful of this. 

THE MOVE TO DE-RACIALIZE BLACK PEOPLE

By Mary (Guest Commentator) 

Some Black people believe that we are moving toward a racially homogenous society.  I don’t think reality supports that assumption… The most vocal discussions among Latinos are not about ‘dropping’ their Latino identity.  They are dialoguing about ways Anglo America can accommodate them.  They are even expecting the USA to accommodate those Latinos who violate our immigration policies.  The official language of our country is English but if you go to your nearest Chinatown you will notice there are signs in Chinese everywhere.  The Chinese language is used even by White-owned corporations that want to reach Asian Americans - Asian AMERICANS, not Asians in ASIA.   Asian Americans are making Whites accommodate them too.  Both groups are serious about pushing to fortify their ethnic identities and ethnic communities in America.  The Harvest Institute newsletter notes a Latino leader who declared that “Black people may overcome, but WE [Hispanics] will overwhelm”.  If we really believe these groups are going to drop their cultural/ethnic identities in theUSA in order to become “just human beings” on the same level of everybody else (including Black people) we are sadly mistaken and not understanding the depth of racism and what is happening before our eyes.

I don’t think we should believe that because some Asians and Hispanics are out-marrying that this is another example of everyone merging identities.  There are some Asians and Hispanics who are intermarrying with Whites but they are being used to diversify the White gene pool without adding too much color.  It appears that the offspring of these relationships gravitate toward White-identification and are used to create a bulkier, pseudo White race in the face of a dwindling White birth rate…White society uses a code of conduct that acts as a reward and punishment system [the punishment being more hostility/isolation directed at Whites who marry Blacks and the reward being less hostility/more inclusion given to Whites who marry Asians, Hispanics, and Native Americans]. Using that system, Whites encourage/direct other Whites (who seek racial variety in a mate) to intermarry with groups in which the offspring will be more readily accepted and assimilated as a White person within White culture. 

Do you really think White Americans will let go of St. Patrick Day parades, Little Italy festivities and the mandatory study of White history (in order for anybody to graduate from grammar, junior high, and high school)? Native Americans will continue to have their Pow Wows and Chinese Americans will continue to celebrate the Chinese New Year, etc. We have to be careful that we are not tricked into being the only group who pushes to drop our ethnicity while others (with regards to their actions) fortify their ethnic identities in spite of what they may say to their Black ‘friends’ in social settings.  In actuality, those groups are not only building more ethnic enclaves across the country, they are also acting as White people’s cohorts in an effort to sustain the side benefits they receive from anti-Black racism. (1. Check out the video on the Black Hair Care industry in my Blog; 2. note the recent vote by Cherokees to oust Black Freedmen; 3. Read Myspace’s Rob_Jay’s Blog on acts of Brown on Black ethnic-cleansing in Los Angeles).  Also, these other groups had the opportunity to embed their racial identities into the names of their ethnicities/nationalities.  We know who a Chinese person is, who a Native American is and who a Mexican person is.

White racism is hardest on those with the most potential to destroy Whiteness.  Given this fact along with the legacy of U.S. Slavery and Jim Crow, Black people in the USA have had a more difficult time developing their racial identity into a solid “ethnicity”.  We have Black and “African American” now.  In fact, Black Americans will soon be facing an increasing fight to have control of the latter ‘ethnic’ term as Whites like actress Charlize Theron are categorizing themselves as “Africans” in America.  That challenge to Black people being seen as the only “African Americans” has even slid its way into a popular movie [Mean Girls] and t-shirts that read “You can’t be from Africa, You’re White”, implying that it’s silly to not view a White person as an African in American ["African American"] too.  There was a lawsuit filed by a White immigrant who claimed he was entitled to scholarships set aside for “African Americans”.  We will not come out the winners if we are tricked into moving away from a racial identity to embrace a “non-racial” identity. 

Whites are doing everything they can to make sure that their White genes survive under the most dire circumstances. They are manipulating genes and owning/operating fertility clinics (for frozen embryos, egg and sperm donors).  They are so determined not to abandon who they are, they even operate cryongenic facilities to ‘preserve’ the Whites who have kicked the proverbial bucket and they use satellites to beam their images into outerspace as the ‘norm’ of what a hueman looks like JUST IN CASE other beings may be out there gathering information on earthlings.  The scenario is a bit funny if it were a cartoon and joke but their efforts to maintain their identity is real.

What Whites (and some others) would like to see happen in the USA (with regards to Black people) is an incorporation or an imitation of the racial system of Latin America.  At one point, Anglos viewed Spaniards as having a less intelligent system of racism in comparison to their own.  Now, Anglo racists are starting to realize that the Spaniards and Portuguese may have had a more ingenious approach to Black oppression.  In Latin America, Black people are dealing with White racism too.  However, Black people in Latin America experience a much harder time proving racism because Whites in those areas have encouraged Black people to move toward declassifying themselves as ‘Black’. That’s what type of racial system this country is really moving toward when they discuss deracializing and becoming “multi-racial”, “bi-racial” or “just human/American”. 

It’s hueman nature to name and categorize things. It’s not a bad thing. It’s an important hueman activity that is used to identify what is useful, what is harmful, what is a problem and what is a solution. The major reason why some of us associate this activity as something foul is due to the long-standing negative example Whites have given us in their mis-use of it… Whites… understand that it’s very hard for people to mentally prepare a fight against something they cannot put a name on and place in a category.  At one point, Whites (unknowingly) were helping their victims fight against them by acknowledging and naming the systems of their racist oppression (i.e. Slavery, Jim Crow, Segregation and Apartheid). Whites have recognized their folly. They have evolved their racism to the next level.  The refining move is to ‘un-name’ and de-racialize.  So the code of conduct now is to not mention (or acknowledge) race/racism unless it’s “reverse racism” or “Black racism”.  Also, the new game plan is to encourage Blacks to un-name themselves as Black people and rename themselves something more racially ambiguous like “biracial” but notice that these same Whites do not pressure people like Keanu Reeves (who has an Asian parent) to do the same thing.  I remember telling Clare that I read an article in which Keanu Reeves declared himself an ordinary “White boy from Toronto” in a Details magazine article.  Not one letter in the following issues of that magazine protested or challenged Keanu Reeves’ White boy declaration.  No one asked him to acknowledge his Asian parent by re-defining himself as biracial.  The readership of that magazine is largely White, the same group that chastizes Black people like Tracy Ross for calling herself “Black” and complains that Black biracials who view themselves as “Black” are denying a parent. The Keanu Reeves/Tracy Ross example are not isolated cases. They demonstrate that not everyone is being encouraged to drop their racial identities in favor of moving toward racial homogeny. 

For the reasons above I am definitely against a move for racial ambiguity for Blacks. I feel that it is not a smart move.

[This is an abridged version of the original article which appeared in Black Women In Conversation and Mary kindly agreed for me to re-post it here.  Mary has previously commented on this blog as "RavenWings"].

Link: Mary’s website