I have never owned a hardcopy edition of The Shaping of Black America by Lerone Bennett. I have had several paperback copies.
I am in the process of getting so many new books I'll probably ship them home by FedEx. It's that or wear multiple sets of clothes to make room in the suitcase. There's a book signing, and the last two living men whom I acknowledge as Village Elder: Drs. John Hope Franklin and Lerone Bennett. I will be buying a copy of Dr. Franklin's Mirror to America there. I was hoping to get another copy of The Shaping of Black America...if you're going to be all fanboy it should be over your favorite book...but it wasn't listed among the books he was to have with him at the signing.
So I'm wandering the merchant stalls and see one...as I think about it, I didn't pay much attention to the name on the booth. I just saw a lot of Ebony Magazines and a pile of Before the Mayflower: A History of Black America. [LATER: Johnson Publishing. Duh.] I ask the sister on the table, "You wouldn't have The Shaping of Black America, would you?" She answered, "Why wouldn't I?"
I expected paperback. I got a properly made, pass-down-to-the-kids hardcover.
Sister said, "You can get it autographed, he'll be here." I said, "Yea, I'm going to the book signing tonight." She said, "No, I mean he's coming here this afternoon."
I hyperventilated for a moment. Fortunately he wasn't due for another two hours.
Two hours later we talked for a while...he's working to get a new paperback version of The Shaping of Black America; you should get it. You should read it. And when you actually admire a person they don't have to agree with you more than once or twice to make you think you're brilliant. We agreed absolutely on this point: there is massive support in the Black communities for a truly progressive Black agenda. The problem is the rhetoric in play scares the shit out of them.
That is all that was cleared by the good doctor. The rest is me.
Taking a totally ahistoric look at things...which I think is appropriate because American culture thinks it's totally ahistoric...common sense is the problem. Common sense as regards Black people is simply incorrect. Recently I had cause to review a thread in which someone expressed great concern about the "work ethic" of young Black men, and you'll want to explain how the lesser return Black people get for their efforts (see Black Tax) naturally inspires less drive...supply and demand. Which is fine until you check the statistics and find there is no meaningful difference in employment rates of Black folks
| Series Id: LNU01300006 Not Seasonally Adjusted Series title: (Unadj) Labor Force Participation Rate - Black or African American Labor force status: Civilian labor force participation rate Type of data: Percent Age: 16 years and over Race: Black or African American |
|||||||||||||
| Year | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Annual |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996 | 63.0 | 62.4 | 63.4 | 63.4 | 64.0 | 64.6 | 66.0 | 65.4 | 63.9 | 64.8 | 64.4 | 64.1 | 64.1 |
| 1997 | 63.5 | 63.5 | 64.1 | 63.8 | 64.2 | 65.1 | 66.1 | 66.4 | 65.2 | 64.8 | 64.7 | 64.9 | 64.7 |
| 1998 | 64.2 | 64.5 | 65.4 | 64.9 | 64.6 | 66.5 | 67.3 | 66.1 | 65.4 | 66.2 | 66.1 | 65.7 | 65.6 |
| 1999 | 65.3 | 64.8 | 65.2 | 65.2 | 65.5 | 66.3 | 67.3 | 66.2 | 66.1 | 66.1 | 66.2 | 65.8 | 65.8 |
| 2000 | 65.8 | 66.3 | 65.9 | 65.6 | 65.7 | 66.3 | 66.5 | 65.7 | 64.8 | 65.5 | 66.1 | 65.8 | 65.8 |
| 2001 | 65.2 | 64.8 | 65.5 | 65.0 | 65.1 | 66.1 | 66.3 | 65.5 | 65.1 | 65.0 | 64.9 | 65.3 | 65.3 |
| 2002 | 64.4 | 64.4 | 64.6 | 64.8 | 65.0 | 65.3 | 65.0 | 64.7 | 64.9 | 64.8 | 64.4 | 64.9 | 64.8 |
| 2003 | 63.8 | 63.8 | 63.7 | 64.2 | 64.6 | 65.6 | 65.3 | 64.6 | 64.4 | 64.2 | 64.2 | 63.4 | 64.3 |
| 2004 | 63.5 | 62.8 | 63.7 | 63.1 | 63.0 | 64.1 | 65.2 | 64.3 | 63.9 | 64.5 | 64.1 | 63.8 | 63.8 |
| 2005 | 62.9 | 62.8 | 63.2 | 63.5 | 64.2 | 65.6 | 65.8 | 64.9 | 64.3 | 64.7 | 64.4 | 63.6 | 64.2 |
| 2006 | 62.6 | 63.6 | |||||||||||
And white folks:
| Series Id: LNU01300003 Not Seasonally Adjusted Series title: (Unadj) Labor Force Participation Rate - White Labor force status: Civilian labor force participation rate Type of data: Percent Age: 16 years and over Race: White |
|||||||||||||
| Year | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Annual |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996 | 66.3 | 66.7 | 66.9 | 66.7 | 67.1 | 67.8 | 68.2 | 67.5 | 67.2 | 67.4 | 67.4 | 67.2 | 67.2 |
| 1997 | 66.9 | 67.0 | 67.3 | 67.1 | 67.4 | 68.2 | 68.4 | 67.8 | 67.3 | 67.5 | 67.5 | 67.3 | 67.5 |
| 1998 | 66.9 | 67.0 | 67.1 | 66.8 | 67.3 | 67.9 | 68.0 | 67.6 | 67.3 | 67.3 | 67.3 | 67.2 | 67.3 |
| 1999 | 67.0 | 67.1 | 67.1 | 66.9 | 67.2 | 68.0 | 68.1 | 67.6 | 67.0 | 67.2 | 67.2 | 67.3 | 67.3 |
| 2000 | 67.0 | 67.2 | 67.3 | 67.3 | 67.1 | 67.9 | 67.8 | 67.4 | 67.0 | 67.0 | 67.0 | 67.1 | 67.3 |
| 2001 | 67.0 | 67.1 | 67.3 | 66.9 | 66.8 | 67.5 | 67.6 | 66.9 | 66.8 | 67.0 | 66.9 | 66.8 | 67.0 |
| 2002 | 66.5 | 66.9 | 66.8 | 66.7 | 66.8 | 67.4 | 67.5 | 67.1 | 66.7 | 66.8 | 66.5 | 66.3 | 66.8 |
| 2003 | 66.3 | 66.5 | 66.5 | 66.5 | 66.4 | 67.2 | 67.0 | 66.6 | 66.1 | 66.3 | 66.4 | 66.1 | 66.5 |
| 2004 | 66.0 | 66.1 | 66.1 | 66.0 | 66.2 | 66.9 | 67.0 | 66.5 | 66.0 | 66.2 | 66.3 | 66.1 | 66.3 |
| 2005 | 65.8 | 66.0 | 65.9 | 66.1 | 66.3 | 66.7 | 66.9 | 66.7 | 66.3 | 66.4 | 66.4 | 66.2 | 66.3 |
| 2006 | 66.0 | 66.0 | |||||||||||
I should probably get a fresh copy of those charts but it was a pain in the ass to format them for the page the first time. Beside, the point is still made.
Common knowlege.
And you know what, you can send all the messages you want over the digital Underground Railroad, but if you don't give people reasons they are comfortable repeating out loud your data will never become common knowlege.
I repeat: if you don't give people reasons they are comfortable repeating out loud your data will never...NEVER...become common knowlege.
Man, sometimes I get feeling Rovian. Sometimes I think it would be so easy to move masses of people if I were willing to lie like fuk.
This is about what to do, not why to do. And it grates because we've historically had to modulate our actual opinions. That's like a psychic amputation without anesthesia, and not one of us wants to do it anymore; not even the few who've never really had to; we're talking about the memory of a people here, not that of individual persons. So no, we don't want anyone telling us what to think. But because we are People of the Word, we confuse form and content. We don't see we can pour any content into any number of verbal vessels without spilling a goddamn drop.
Our dilemma was described best, actually, by a Buddhist sutra I once read: words are void, but that's all we have to work with.
That we can pour any content into any number of verbal vessels doesn't mean we can pour any content into any of them. But it really makes sense to pour it into containers that as many people as possible can reach. A dedicated minority and all that, but the more the merrier too.
Oh, Dr. Bennett said one more thing. He said I don't have to worry about not being an historian. That statement is only connected with the preceding rant in my own mind.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo