A dream dies at NAACP
By Clarence Page
March 10, 2007Mr. Gordon had the audacity to hope for an expanded NAACP mission. He set out with a corporate CEO's sense of urgency to target, for example, the continuing crises of undereducated black males. Mr. Gordon understood something that its chairman, Julian Bond, a star 1960s movement veteran, and numerous others in the organization's breathtakingly huge 64-member board refuse to face: White racism is not the biggest problem holding back the advancement of people of color today.
Oh? When did he say that?
"Just look at his actions, his career...he didn't let racism stop him..."
Which says nothing about whether or not he felt it was his biggest obstacle. And you can't even ask him, not really. Not when it's still true that, as an anonymous Black senior executive told the NY Times a while back, for folks of that caste there is no up side to honest disclosures on the subject.
The presumption that white racism isn't even a problem worthy of addressing in a world where the Civil Rights division of the Justice Dept. has been replaced with people whose civil rights litigation experience is all representing the side that wants to end them is...
"Oh, I'm not saying that..."
You're saying the N.A.A.C.P. shouldn't be the ones to address it?
"I'm saying they should address the biggest problem first."
And I can understand that...if the N.A.A.C.P. has sole responsibility for addressing Black people's problems. They do not...and don't even want it.
The N.A.A.C.P. is not a Black partisan crew...they ONLY do coalition politics. Go through their website, make no assumptions, and see if you can find a policy designed for Black folks. We're included on an equal basis.
I know the history, totally understand how and why that happened. And if you go through that website you'll see they're talking about things that still need discussion. But at one time, back when only Blacks were Colored, it was a Colored Black partisan organization. And I think we need one of those right about now.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
Why the Phuck
is clarence page such a ho? seriously? what's with the bullshit poverty statistics - as if the index is actually relevant...that name's been ruined for a generation...awful!!!!
The Last Dinosaur
Check out Anthony Asadullah Samad's take on the NAACP over at the Black Commentator.
Honestly, for me, it goes back to
DuBois leaving the organization. He created an organization which was hijacked at its inception. That he left the organization in the manner he did speaks volumes about what this organization and its leaders have been about for DECADES. In many respects, they're akin to the Vichy French.
Samad's piece made me even sadder
It was insightful, and disheartening.
Don't Be Disheartened
There has been a battle going on between the NAACP and pro-Black organizations/individuals for nearly 100 years. This is merely a lightweight manifestation of that fight. This is in a small way a continuum of the battle fought against Washington's disciples and Garvey and against the radicalism of A. Philip Randolph and the political/labor/education agitation of Adam Clayton Powell and the emergent radicalism of SNCC and the theoretical clarity of Ella Baker and the operational courage of Fannie Lou Hamer. What's new here? Nothing. This is part of a continuum of subsidized dysfunction. White America has paid the bills for this organization since 1919. It's been a wrap from jump street.
Of course the organization has had tremendous utility for its narrow focus. There was/is some value in that - but it has always been INTENTIONALLY MISMATCHED to the needs of the core majority of Black folk. For a people who still do not control a single industry to expend energy of this organization is simply foolhardy. Time is short...we're all gonna be dead soon enough.
DuBois and the NAACP
DuBois leaving the organization. He created an organization which was hijacked at its inception. That he left the organization in the manner he did speaks volumes about what this organization and its leaders have been about for DECADES. In many respects, they're akin to the Vichy French.
The Vichy French! That's harsh, T3, harsh.
Some of the NAACP's black founders did encourage the government to go after Marcus Garvey but that's a mild form of collaboration, nonetheless deplorable, compared to the Vichy French
Many black socialists and radicals looked askance at DuBois because, for example, he was anti-union, favored America's entry into World War I and was opposed to efforts to forge links between folks in the African Diaspora. DuBois later changed his mind about these and other issues but the radicalism we remember him for came late in his life.
There was/is some value in
There was/is some value in that - but it has always been INTENTIONALLY MISMATCHED to the needs of the core majority of Black folk.
Amen! This is an important insight into the core problems of the organization.
Harsh, perhaps, but
the goal of the organization has been to carve a way out for those at the top of the heap - at the expense of building anything that looks like a sustainable economic or cultural program. no people on the planet can be sustained without economics or culture - they simply cease to be a people...and the naacp has long ceased to organize, hence it is an "organization" in name mostly which is propped up by wealthy white interests...take away those corporate dollars and that board would shrivel like an 98 year-old penis. they'd be lucky to have two members (no pun intended). of course dubois was no spring chicken when he founded the naacp...he just about lived forever...and you are absolutely correct that he became more radical (ie. focused on economic and cultural solutions for black folk) with each passing year.
and the naacp has long
and the naacp has long ceased to organize, hence it is an "organization" in name mostly which is propped up by wealthy white interests.
That's why we called it the National Association for the Advancement of Certain People. Â