Yet more things to consider

Ignore what CN is proposing here.

If you follow the firstlink in his comment above, you'll see he made this statement:

Here were the key takeaways;

1. Black scientists and technologists must assume the mantle of cultural leadership across the diaspora - with full support from black business, political, and celebrity cohorts.

2. We must operate with complete autonomy and accept no editorial or creative interference - which means we have to be completely self-sufficient.

3. In precisely the same unfettered way we repurposed two turntables and a microphone - and in the process introduced open source culture into the noosphere - we must repurpose vastnesses of infrastructure and our dependence on the same.

4. Black youth culture is the most powerful and influential force in world-wide popular culture - it is our privilege and duty to aid, abet, and guide that divine wind into its full modal potential as the fountainhead of an alternative social matrix of substantive competitive cooperation.

His actual point seems to be that acting within a paradigm draws you further and further into that paradigm.

Me, I have the feeling the U.S.ofA. is going to functionally disaggregate...functionally the national citizen (thank you, Lester) will cease to be. One major repercussion of this will be that your rights will be the sum of the rights of all your in-groups, as those in-groups are perceived in the particular (probably) state (though it may seriously be more "fine grained"than that).

If Black folks come to see they should address the issues that affect us as an effective constituency, we need a replacement for the NAACP...more accurately, we need an organization that facilitates  communication to, for and among the Black constiituencies. The NAACP could build that organization on its historical reputation. I'm curious to see if their new prez comes up with something more relevant that the lack of negroes on Friends.

That is a strong possibility but it is also entirely possible that you could create a measure of disequilibrium within the paradigm and thus act to overthrow it or create a new paradigm.

...which would make you "in it but not of it."

As for the National Association for the Advancement of Certain People aka National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, if the new prez thinks that its mission should be to foster communication among black constituencies then that would represent an important turning point in the organization's history and development.

It certainly would. It would be a turning point in our national history as well.

On the other hand, the folks who join and run the NAACP are people who are, by and large, extremely risk adverse.

Then they'd be best served by an organization that reduces the increased risks caused by racism. At minimum, one that enhances their ability to deal with/withstand them. And such an organization would need them, too.

The more closely I read you PT, the clearer it becomes that this is a significant point of departure in our respective world views.

Is it necessary to agree with your world view?

Here's a metaphor from my wasted youth. Me and my cousin used to see these two excellent females that lived near each other. About a half-hour drive...I had a job and no car, he had a car, a year's worth of paid up insurance but was between gigs. I bought gas and he drove us to our respective destinations for our respective reasons.

We're even, right?

And yeah, Craig, you need to turn it down. 

CN:

Aside from the obvious embargo on corn pressing, tell me what would you do to make it otherwise?

I do have a very, very cnulan-specific response that starts out with

what you feel, and what you say - are at cross-purposes. in order to be honest with me, you must at least be honest with yourself.

We acknowledge at this point the offense is intentional. I don't understand what it's intended to do. Not if nation building is the point.

You are by no means unique in baffling me this way, so this is a general response.

There is no nation now. You have to draw people in, invite people in, because they don't believe you yet. Offending people does not draw them in. Especially when you go after someone with whom you're in basic solidarity.

Seriously, extract the ideas and consider the form...how is what you do different than those Black Conservatives that attack the community? I tell DW domination is a non-starter and let some brothas kick it like that? I don't think so...I didn't say WHITE domination is a non-starter.

What would I do to make it otherwise? You and I aren't doing the same thing, I've always known that. Our operating space overlaps...

What do I think I should do? Watch what I do...that's the best answer. 

You speak for all immunes

In this case I speak fot all humans. 

Your penchant for personal attack doesn't reflect well on you or your cause. You need to stop. 

What am I accusing you of?

Alienating people who could understand you and use what you say. And if what you say has truth, you are actually causing damage thereby.

You need to stop. You are responsible when your approach turns people away.

By the way:

So you see, it is inevitable that the truth of what I say and the examples I make of dopaminergic post hoc rationalization will turn away precisely those least able to rid themselves of their addiction. 

It turns away a lot more than addicts. And it's not necessary...you yourself said you don't do it in person.

Consider our personal history. If I gauged things as you do, you would not have a single comment on this site. In fact, I'm probably the most forgiving "Black Bill O'Reilly" you ever accused of being a "Black Bill O'Reilly."