August 31, 2004

women who like to keep the ____ up inside of them!

Whatever happened to the tradition of the man wanting a “pure” woman? It seems that the music industry has popular artist that are propagating the idea that what men want are women who like to keep the ____ up inside of them. Other says that they want a lady on the streets but a freak in the sheets. Is this what men, brothers, really want?

I am not qualified to speak on behalf of all men, but I tent to think that the more promiscuous or freaky that a women’s behavior is, the less respect they receive. There has to be a correlation between respectability and promiscuity, manifesting, I tend to believe, in an inverse relationship. The reason being is that most 25 year old women have likely had many different consummated relationships and the value of such freaky skills at providing pleasure only comes from practice and what self respecting man wants to marry a women whose done freaked the town?

I also tend to think that the qualifications for a wife are or should be antithetical to the qualifications of a freak. Thus, I do not think that a women who ultimately wants to become a wife and maintain a successful marriage, should be training for such by being promiscuous. However, many young females are engaged in a competition for males that makes them feel compelled to do things that they really have reservations about. They do it because they feel they have no chance at keeping the guy, because other women will do it if they do not.

Could this be one of the main reasons that men are not getting married like they used to? I certainly believe it is, while also not being the only reason. The reason being is women are playing right into the hands of the biological directive of men, which is to copulate as much as possible. Throw in variety and you have the kid in the candy store syndrome. Marriage is simply a social and cultural construct, while the urge or need to copulate frequently is a biological directive for men. Thus, men can still fulfill their primal needs outside of marriage, given that there is such a large pool of women who provide intercourse outside the institution of marriage.

In order increase the incentive for marriage, women need to therefore restrict intercourse to marriage. If a man has few opportunities outside of marriage to copulate frequently, as compared to his opportunities being married, his natural drives and needs will lead him to marriage. In other words, given the decline of cultural traditions (like traditional marriage), the demand for marriage is contingent upon the supply or opportunities for sex and children outside the institution of marriage. If a man can have, sex, progeny and most other traditional benefits of marriage…outside of marriage….then there is little incentive for marriage other than tradition.

As far as I am concerned, the only purpose of marriage is for the producing of progeny and the maximum facilitation of nurturing, protection and provision to raise children to independence as adults. With the current arrangement, the burden of child rearing falls on the mother. Therefore, the losers in this current arrangement are women and children, while the profit goes to the men. As long as children are not being created, promiscuity biggest threat is the spread of disease, but both the women and man benefit equally from the pleasure of promiscuity.

I dare say, knowing of plenty of attractive sister now into there thirties, with children by different daddies, that in the long run most promiscuous women don’t end up happy in the long run. Their looks start to fade with age and a lot of brothers don’t want an instant family of 2 or 3 kids that are not biologically their own. Now such women are slowing down and looking for a “good man”, now that she is burnt out after trying to convert the “players” and “ballers” and the fact that younger women are out competing them with their youth full phenotypes.

The competition between women, for the favor of men, is simply resulting in a race to the bottom for women.

August 30, 2004

Conflicting Emotions

As part of human nature, our behavior and actions are most often driven by emotions. Some external (or internal) stimuli is picked up by our sensory receptors and in turn triggers and evolved emotional response that has the purpose of promoting life’s prime directives of survival and or progeny. In light of this, there must be a relative or absolute void in external stimuli that triggers, fear, love, anger, compassion, or other motivating responses that would inspire a coalescing for survival among black people of the earth.

The absence of strong emotions on the part of the typical black person, in regards to the situation of the earth’s masses of blacks, is rather perplexing. The reason being is that there are certainly no shortages of phenomenon that should trigger such emotions. All around the world black people are suffering in absolute, relative and degree measurements. Poverty, wars, disease, racism, homicides, incarceration and many other problems is making life on earth for black people much worse than for most others. Yet, where are the emotional survival responses from the black masses that one would expect?

The only rational explanation as to why we do not “FEEL” as we should is likely due to ignorance and or not seeing commonality with the masses of black people on this earth. When blacks were being lynched in the South and their existed a consensus of a clear enemy that was anti-black, such a knowledge coalesced us to promote our survival. Now, we still are suffering, but the enemy appears stealth and often appears to be those nearest to us, which is other black people. There are no more “white only” and “colored only” signs. The Slave trade and Jim Crow is defunct. Notwithstanding, although less than in the past, we as a people are still suffering. So what gives?

The day to day visible enemy and threat to most black people is other black people, while the forces that are triggering this affect remains in stealth. Consequently, we have evolved under the Western system to see ourselves as the enemy. There is a thin line between the emotions of love and hate...and we are walking that line between our own people. We cannot see the forest due to the trees and the trees in front of us happen to be black like us, distorting our view of the "big picture". Thus, the person who shot your little brother was black. The person who robbed you mother was black. The person who broke into your home was black. The women or man who cheated on you was black. The people that you compete with for rank and mating are black. The tribe that attacked your tribe was black. The people running the local government that fails to meet expectation of the citizens are black. Most of our immediate visible problems and threats seem to eminate from other black peoples.

In light of this visibility of the symptomatic superficial enemy, which is ourselves, and the stealth of the greater forces that shape our reaction, our emotional responses have turned to work against our survival. Think about it. Other than employment fears, most of our visible fears and threats to our daily survival comes from other black folks. The resultant is that we have stop cooperating with one an other, to promote our mutual survival, and have started seeing each other as the primary threat to our survival, needs and desires.

A glaring example of this is the dwindling relationship between the black man and women, in regards to longevity and commitment. The relationship between the man and women is the core component or relationship that all else is built from. From this relationship comes the pillar collective institution of family. From family grows villages, communities, tribes and nations. But it all starts with the man and women. However, under this system that we exist, the black man and women have become competitors and not cooperators. The traditional roles and expectations have become all twisted by Western society to the point that many women really only need a man for copulating, and of course, men are more than willing to simply play that role. The consequence is short term relationships based upon pleasure, not long-term commitment and child rearing, resulting in children born out of wedlock and many single parent mothers with children by multiple men.

Another bad sign is that when we run into other black people, while out and about in predominantly white areas, we do not even acknowledge one and other any more. I can remember nearly ubiquitously being acknowledged by other black people, when I was in a predominantly white area. It used to be that we were comforted by the presence of other black folk, when we were in these areas. Now, that is no longer true. It seems that when I am in those areas, black people feel no need to acknowledge me. Likely, their comfort with white folks has grown to such a degree that I am likely perceived as a bigger threat than white folks. Maybe some of the brothers think I am coming out their to compete with them for white women, jobs or something else.

The enemy to black folks, which seems stealth to most, is the “system” of institutions of this nation, the primary culprits being the system of politics and economics. While people may not appear as your enemy directly, many are your enemy indirectly, in regards to their beliefs which manifest in the way they vote. It is the plurality of these votes that keeps a system in place that works to the disadvantage of many black people.

We live in a representive form of democracy where the majority interest sets policy. Regardless of which party, in our two party system, they both are dominated by and represents the majority interest of white America. Black folks have peculiar interest, relative to the nations history with the "peculiar Institution" of slavery and Jim Crow. Repair or rehabiliation from that history is not of primary conscern of white people, regardless of political affiliation.

In light of this, one can be robbed and assaulted indirectly, via the way that people vote. Instead of using signs to separate and deny opportunities, as in the past, people of like interest simply cast votes that have the result of producing nearly the same effect. Racism is not simply knocking people down, as past overt racism did, but also, preventing people from getting up. If you prevent people from getting up, then you preserve the effect of the knock down, thus preventing the need for knocking the person down again. People manifest their prejudice through instruments of the system, in order to remain anonymous.

The consquence of these systematic activities appear in statitics like the unemployment rate, which is consitantly 2.5 times the rate of whites. It also appears in the poverty rate, which is also 2.5 the rates of whites. It also appears in per capita median income comparison descrapancies and a host of other socioeconomic baramoters that results in symptoms that in black on black crime and family erosion.

Black people indeed does have an enemy, but we have been fooled into beleiving that it is each other. Divide and conquere has always been a favored M.O. for the elites. Whether by coicidence or conspiracy or both, being divided is conquering the rise of the black world to its proper equalibrium with the rest of humanity.

The “trees” that are in front of us, namely other black people, blinds of from seeing the forest, which are the activities of Western white peoples.

A simple question....

Enough said...

August 29, 2004

"Black People" and Reparation Checks

It has been said more than once, it has been said in a major motion picture, a popular black comedian did a skit on it and I even seen the idea advanced on one of the cable networks; If "Black People" are given reparations in the form of a check, this or that will happen. In the movie Barber Shop Cedric the Entertainer said that we would spend it all on Cadillac’s, Dave Chappelle did a skit on his show that portrayed us spending reparation checks on Chicken and many other things.

The sad part about this garbage being spoken on television and in movies is that no one has challenged this foolishness. When ever I hear a Black person advance this idea I ask them if that is what they will do, and of course they say no. I then ask, if not you then who? They of course say other people, you know “Black people”. The truth is Black men and women will not spend money giving to us for reparations any different than white folk or any other group of people would spend money given to them or money they already have. When we look at the idea that “Black People” will run out and buy this car or that car in large quantities, we see that this ignores that there is no one car that has been purchased by more Black folk than any other group of people. Even the Cadillac Escalade which is commonly referred to as the car “Black People” will run out and buy is driven by more white folk than by us. So what would be so weird about Black men and women buying a car if they need one? As far as fast food restaurant becoming this or that because Black men and women have come into some money, this to ignore the fact that no fast food operation is in business because "Black People" are their biggest customers and that includes the Big Chicken chains, thus we would only be spending our money as those who already have money spend theirs.

We can expect and should expect that some people who have never had money will spend it frivolously but to suggest that “Black People” will spend money this way or that way can only mean that their is a fundamental belief that we lack the discipline other groups of people allegedly have to spend money wisely; as if we will spend it on things that is not being purchased by those who have money already. The sad part about this belief is that it is espoused by other Black folk who apparently do not consider themselves “Black people”.

I believe if given reparations in the form of a check "Black People" will spend it on various things that include but not limited to; cars, if we do not have one, a home if we do not have one, some of us would use it to send our children to College or to a private grade school, some of us would use it to take care relatives suffering from some illness, some of us will use it clear up any debt we have and the list goes on. It is about time we start challenging those Black folk who continue to advance the idiotic idea that “Black people” will spend reparations given in the form of a check irresponsibly and remind them that they are "Black People" as well.


August 27, 2004

African American children...begging for survival in Africa

I believe that every black person needs to set a goal of visiting Africa at least once in a life time. I did so and it was the second most completing phenomenon in my life, second only to the birth of my daughter. I love Africa, or more correctly, I love the African people. Certainly they lack many of the things that we take for granted, but they are also rich in many of the things we dismiss, but actually hold more value than material wealth.

However, my personal journeys to Africa are not what I want to discuss. Rather, I want to bring to light a horrific journey to Africa by 7 African American children, apparently abandoned there by their adopted mother, who left them in the care of a man she barely knew. This was appalling. The children ended up begging on the streets of a large Nigerian city, for their survival. My heart just went out for these kids, and my animosity boils over the actions of the mother and brother in law.

This is one of the reasons why I am looking into adopting some children. I just cannot stand the thought of something happening to me or my wife and my child end up abused, unloved and uncared for, being shuffled around the system and scared mentally for life. The children are the future and I get extremely upset when I see kids suffering. Lord helps the person If I ever catch someone in the act of abusing a child…

US kids' months of begging in Africa over

'Three of them were sick - they could not walk'

August 26, 2004

Not seeing the forest due to the trees

Most people cannot see the forest or reality due to the trees of propaganda. Everyone is selling education as the cure all for what ills the nation in regards to socioeconomics and class stratification. However, the reality is that the demand in the economy for college educated people is much less than the demand in the economy for non college graduates.

Supply does not create demand, is the general rule here. Approximately 25% of the jobs in the economy require a college degree. What would happen if 75% of working age adults held college degrees, when only 25% of the jobs being demanded by the economy were commiserate with a college degree? Well, anyone with a cursory understanding of the laws of supply and demand would realize that the value of a college degree would reduce greatly. A glut of Engineers and professionals would simply bid down the salaries and wages of those professions in a free market.

Not only that, what who would perform the 75% of jobs that did not require a college degree, when only 25% of the working age populous did not hold such a degree? One would expect that the law of supply and demand would in turn increase wages at the low end; however, many of these businesses would go out of businesses because they can only maintain profitability with cheap sources of labor. If they increased their prices to pay workers more, demand for their products would fall and they would again not be profitable.

In light of this, even if it is not a conspiracy, it is certainly in the interest of the elites to maintain failure in the system, so as to properly match the supply of labor with the demands for labor in the economy. The group that would have the most to lose are the currently educated (college degreed) working age adults, which is something like 22% of the working age population. That means that the supply of educated workers has not reached equilibrium with demand. This keeps the salaries and wages of such workers higher than if the market was in equilibrium and extremely higher than they would be if 50% of the working age population had college degrees. Do you think it is in their interest to have increased competition reduce their salaries and wages?

The bottom line is that the system is WORKING, by producing so many failures, which then are matched with low paying jobs that needs such workers to be profitable. If the majority of the working age populous held college degree, but were funneled into low end jobs due to not enough jobs for college graduates in the economy, social revolt against the system would manifest. An electrical engineer saying, “Welcome to McDonald’s…May I take your order”, would result in having the system overhauled.

One is more competitive than not with an education, but lack of education is not the cause of class and social stratification in America. Rather, it is simply a mostly false justification for it, by the elites.

The human need to be heard and the Negro-Con

I think that it is close to being ubiquitously true that most humans want to be heard. Being heard, I believe, is part of the human social interdependency that subsequently arises from a need for attention by each individual. We are all victims of these needs to one degree or another.

Much of living is a competition. This is true of all forms of life, seeking survival and progeny. Thus, in group dynamics, there is often a competition to be heard or for attention, by individuals. Thus, in order to “stand out” and be heard in a group, one must find a way to separate themselves from the others, or simply blend in as part of the collective voice, with not voice being distinguishable from another.

These phenomenons, I due believe, is another cause of the effect of the creation of the Negro-Con. Becoming a Negro-Con can be a conduit for the fulfillment of the individualistic need of being heard and hence, getting attention. Think of a mass choir, such as the Mississippi Mass Choir, with 50 voices singing in harmony. It is hard for one person to get attention is they are all singing in unity. However, one can easily get attention by being off key or out of harmony with the others. This is the Negro-Con in the mass choir of black America.

The Negro-con cannot be heard and cannot get attention, and hence cannot be promoted in the mass choir of black thought and opinion, so he or she needs to think and opine out of tune with the masses. Now, obviously, being heard and getting attention is an individualistic objective and individualistic objectives are often the enemy of collective objectives. Singing in concert, like a mass choir, is not promoting individuals, but the collective.

The Negro-Con has started a new choir, sponsored and funded by white conservatives who provide what songs to sing and what keys to sing in. However, they get promoted by the white conservative power structure, which then allows there singing to be heard nationwide. Many of the Negro-Cons are often more than glad to speak out against the mass black choir singing in harmony, because they resent the choir not allowing them to be heard or to sing off key to the collective harmony and interest of the group.

What the Negro-Con really covets is power and before he can get power he must gain attention by being heard. He or she wants a coup of the current black leadership, who they feel are controlling the mass choir, by choosing the songs and what keys to sing in.

The Negro-Con has simply fallen victim to the plague of individualism that is eroding collective institutions.

August 25, 2004

The Grammarian Challenged Negro-Con Speaks....But is he saying anything?

If there is any doubt about how the Negro-Con feel or to what extent he will go to defend his master, take a peek at the “Grammarian Challenged" as noted by Brother Noah, Jessie Petersons latest article. He is pissed that there are some rich Black folk who have not accepted white lies and are not grateful to white America because they understand they made it in spite of the road blocks. This Negro-Con wrote in his article about Will Smith concerning some comments Mr. Smith made;

"You cannot get much more hypocritical than that. Smith's evident contempt for America is baffling. He is apparently thankless for the opportunities America has given him to be free, work hard and succeed."

This is unbelievable… then he writes…

"Smith's contempt for white Americans is similarly shocking. Smith has white Americans to thank for his success. White Americans go to his films and buy his compact discs. And yet, Smith speaks of having "a constant feeling of unease."

Is this not an example of Peterson going against that B.S. espoused by Negro-Cons and their white counterparts about how hard work will pay off. Here we have Will Smith who has indeed worked hard to get where he is but have not lost sight of Black reality and where he came from and where many of his people still remain. Peterson wants Will Smith to kiss the back sides of white folk like he does and get on his knees and thank them for his success. However, when we accuse these Negro-Cons of being fully funded, supported and mouth pieces for white folk they balk at such an assertion. This piece by Peterson not only proves we are right but it also proves that the Negro-Cons know we are right. The truth is Peterson is the one who should be thankful to white folk, they took him and fixed him up and put words in his mouth that he have a hard time speaking but yet they still put him out there. If Peterson was speaking on behalf of Black people those same white folk that he think love him now would dismiss him as inarticulate and a borderline retard but yet they want us to take him serious.

Later in the Article Peterson rants about Denzel, who just so happened to be mentioned as a shinning example of Black love in Brother Noah’s most recent essay. Petersons says of Denzel complaints about immense difficulties of life in a racist society that he would love to have Washington’s difficulties, “starting with the multimillion-dollar paycheck”. You see, it is all about money for this Negro-Con, if he could make the money he is making as a mouth piece for white folk and could get the notoriety he has as a mouth piece for white folk by defending Black men and women he might come home.

His ending paragraph about being a victim and having a victim mentality reminds me of something written by Paul street over on

The harsh material and structural-racist reality of American society interacts with timeworn, victim-blaming ruling-class explanations of poverty to play an ugly game on the nation’s most truly disadvantaged. They are expected to magically leap beyond their social-historical circumstances – to exercise an inordinately high degree of sound personal responsibility just to keep their heads above water – while others are structurally empowered to “pass Go and collect $2 million” without such exercise, and indeed to deepen the well of black disadvantage.


The Buick Salesman who only drives Fords.

The Buick Salesman who only drives Fords.

How would you feel if you went to a Buick dealer and the salesman was touting the performance and dependability of Buicks, yet, you come to find that the salesman’s chooses to buy Fords because of personal preference? If you are on the ball you will see the discrepancy as a reason for pause. You might, or should, wonder why this person is selling Buicks and not Fords. You are left with an impression of disingenuousness and will not likely buy what the person is trying to sell…I would think.

Analogous to this people proclaiming to be concerned about black uplift, while at the same time involved in interracial relationships. It is hard to see a black person exposing the promotion or needs of black people, while at the same time engaged in a mating relationship with another race, as being the real deal. I am not suggesting that one cannot be truly committed to Black uplift while dating outside the race. I think that Paul Robeson and Frederick Douglass are good examples to contradict such a notion. However, you cannot deny the conflicting imagery of a black person championing the value or needs of black people, yet not able to find a black mate worthy of their love and commitment.

I am not a person against such relationships, let me state that unequivocally. It is simply not my choice to engage in such behavior while there is the option of black females in abundance. If I were in an area where there were no black women, my biological needs as a man would obviously become the controlling factor in my decision, because the choice would be to either be with or without a woman, and I will not choose the latter. However, it’s highly unlikely that I would place myself in such a predicament given the value of women in my life in general and the value of the black women in my life in particular.

Ones choices are an indication of their value judgment upon the relative worth given to the array of options available to choose from, providing the chooser has what it takes to acquire it. Ones choices can be seen as a yes vote for a particular thing and a no vote for the other things that were not chosen. Consequently, when black people make the choice to date outside their race, when the option to date inside their race is available, it interpreted as a no vote for what black women or men have to offer them. This assertion is based upon the assumption of monogamy and not people holding simultaneous relationships.

It is true, however, that the votes are offsetting in that in a black white relationship one is cast a vote for black and the other is casting a vote for white, with each casting the vote for the opposite of who they are. That having been said, the future of black people is more dependant upon blacks voting for each other than other choosing to vote for us. This is true, if and only if, self determination and affirmation is of value to black people. It is true that discrimination by the larger society has resulted in a negative vote being caste against us, resulting in social and economic hardships. But, we have reached the point diminishing returns in the changing of attitude and behavior of whites. Thus, our collective gains henceforth will come only from the promotion of ourselves.

I believe that there is no higher inspirational and motivation imagery, for black people, than to see other successful black people loving and affirming black people. The image of a successful black man, such as Denzel Washington, in a loving and committed relationship with a black woman that has produced a strong nuclear family, is unmatchable in regards to the power of example. For a brother who can have his choice of women, to choose black women…is a vote for black women. It is a statement that screams I have found the facilitation of my interest and needs in a black women, whom I chose from the array of all women. For a successful black man to not choose a black woman is a statement of the opposite. It says that such an individual could not find a black woman to meet his criteria. Such is tantamount to the company that says it just cannot find any qualified black people to do certain jobs, when we all know that they exist if you really want to find them.

It is not only making the choices of intimate relationships between the opposite sexes. It also manifest in acceptance and promotion of ideology that are accepted as being detrimental for black interest by the vast majority of black people. It is hard to sell yourself, credibly, as a person interest in black uplift, while exposing a social conservative ideology, an ideology adopted by most admitted and practicing anti-black racist. Such is akin to a Minister who preaches the word of God, choosing to vote for legislation that makes living harder for the homeless, by restricting them from public places. That would be the selling of Godliness, while being a doer of the devils work. In the same way, one cannot sell ideology that is harmful to the black masses, while at the same time saying that they are for the black masses. Of, course, such individuals rationalize that they know what’s better for black people, than the 90% of other black folk that disagree.

If one really wants to maximize the promotion of the buying of what they are selling, then they must also be a loyal customer of the product as well. It sends a mixed message when one tries to convince others to do something that they themselves make the choice not to do. It is not what you sell that determines your loyalties; rather, it is what you choose to buy for yourself.

August 24, 2004

New Domain Name.... It is now easy to find us....

You can now reach this site by typing into your browser address bar:

The blogspot address will continue to work as well, you now have more than one way to reach us, thus there is no reason for you not to visit.


Negroism spans the globe,,, Same Circus, Different Clown..

Negroism is not a mentality or behavior limited to the confines of the United States. As you will read, this form of thinking and behavior affects Black men and women where ever you find us, especially in those countries where we are not the majority. When we do not represent the majority population there is always those from amongst us meaning other Black folk that seek the approval of the white folk by way of perpetuating lies and racist ideology held primarily by white folks.

Let’s look at the case of David Mathews who has put together a three part series entitled “The trouble with Black Men” that will air on the BBC. We can conclude from reading about this three part series that he will attempt to tell the viewing audience what is “the trouble with Black men” by only focusing on the side affects of racism and a racist society. David states from the outset:

"There is no single cause for the problems young black men face in Britain today. But one thing I do know is your race, colour or class shouldn't make you deny yourself genuine opportunities or hold you back or limit your ambitions."

With this statement he informs us that his goal is to prove the system works and that it is not the system that deny Black men opportunities by way of a flawed education system, racist hiring practice, a God that looks nothing like them etc.., he is going to ignore all of the things that created Black reality in Britain that mirror Black reality in America to prove to white folk in Britain they are not to blame.

I am not surprised at all with the manner in which he is approaching this subject; this is the same Negro that attacked Black women “specifically Afro-Caribbean women” in his article entitled “Why I prefer to date white women”. After his blistering attack on Black women he could only do one other thing; attack Black men before his usage is spent.

When we juxtapose what is posted about his three part series with what he has written as his reason for dating white women we get a picture that tells us a bit more about him and how he reason or come to the ignorant conclusions he have come to.

In his article "why I prefer to date white women" David writes that over fifty percent of Black men in Britain are in interracial relationships, but yet in his upcoming three part series he notes

“48% of African-Caribbean families in Britain are headed by a single parent (mainly mothers) compared to 22% of the general population.”

His hypocrisy is made clear by this statistic; he first writes why he recklessly abandons the Black family in his article why he prefer to date white women as if it is a badge of honor and now he does a three part series on the problems that exist within the Black family as if he is innocent. He never stopped to think how he and the other fifty percent of Black men in Britain he said dates white women behavior contributes to this problem with their hatred of self and kind and their willingness to love everything but the woman who looks like their Black mothers.

In part three of his series he will look into;

“How accurate is the sexual stereotype of the black man as a well-endowed super-stud who can’t hold down a long term relationship and who's a bad, absent father? David wonders what its prevalence means for relations between black men and black women and the state of the black family.”

In his article "why I prefer to date white women" David writes how the Afro-Caribbean girls, the good Christian ones are pretty strait laced when it comes to sex:

“They expect you to pick them up, pay for dinner and drop them off at the front door with no more than a peck on the cheek. Whereas the white women are often more daring, adventurous, and self assured in the bedroom” (read whorish).

Also note how he refer to the Black women as girls and the white women as women. Instead of trying to debunk a stereotype about Black men being well endowed it would have been better if he would have explored why him and those like him seek out whorish women instead of our Good Christian Afro-Caribbean sisters who would like for the men they get involved with to be self respecting and have respect for them and not treat them as they treat whores.

In part two of his series he will explore Crime, which essentially means he will repackage all the reasons Europeans give for Black men and women making up one percent (1%) of the population but making up twelve (12%) percent of the prison population with a Black face. Should we think it is a coincidence that Britain imprisons so many of its Black citizens while simultaneously witnessing this very phenomena here in the U.S. David goes on to state that when he was young people saw rebelling in the streets as a means to protest against racism but today the youth have found a “new urban enemy, each other”. Is it coincidence that the exact same thing happening in Britain happened right here in the U.S.? Black folk learned long ago not to value Black life, and the punishment for taking a Black life or committing acts of violence against another Black person has always been more lenient than the punishment for taking a white life or commiting an act of violence against a white person. Exploring this would be looking into the cause and we know that is not his goal.

In part one about Work and Education David will explore why:

“Only 25% of African-Caribbean boys get five good GCSEs compared with 51% of the population as a whole.” , “why they prefer street life and turn to music, yearning for success as producers or as footballers as a way to escape the lives they are currently leading.” He will go to a school and speak with a teacher who will say to him; “African-Caribbean boys are under intense pressure from their peers to conform to certain stereotypes of black masculinity and are often denied decent male role models.”

This makes me wonder, here in the U.S. white folk take pride in reminding us with their various studies on how immigrants from the Caribbean Islands are more accomplished than Black men and women born here in the U.S. What is different between those men and women from the Caribbean Islands immigrating to the U.S. and those that are immigrating to Britain? Are the men and women that migrate to the U.S. smarter? Or is the treatment they get in each nation different enough to cause a big difference in their respective realities? Are their realities based on their treatment and their reactions to that treatment? This would be a great case study for David but his goal is not to seek out the cause of the problems, he is seeking to win favor with white folk in Britain and I am certain we will hear from him again as we hear from those who are his mirror image here in the U.S.

David Mathews represent the same Circus the Negro-Cons in the U.S. belong to; he is just another Clown. “Same Circus, Different Clown.


Olympic revelations

I must admit that during the 100 meter dash championship, in the 2004 Athens Olympics, I was rooting for the Jamaican sprinter, over the American sprinters. At first I was rooting for the Americans, but their pompous displays kind of irked me. However, it was not until the sports commentator mentioned that the Jamaican Sprinter was wearing a necklace with the colors of red, black, green and gold. The sprinter fully embraced and symbolized the meaning of those colors in representing the plight and struggle of African people, as well as the people and nation of Jamaica. At that point, I was rooting for the Jamaican over the Americans, however, he finished in forth place and without a medal.

I also found myself rooting for the African Athletes. If anyone has the proclivity of having compassion and support for the underdog, then one has to pull for the Africans. I recently read an article about the Ugandan boxing team barely being able to afford to send their athletes to the Olympics, let alone send them there weeks in advance to train and get acclimated to the climate and conditions as the US and other teams did. Instead, there coach instructed them to train in coats (in the Ugandan heat) to prepare them for the conditions in Greece. This is generally the case of most African Athletes in the Olympics. They simply do not have the funds and facilities to properly train their athletes.

I think that the Olympics provides a venue that allows the revelation of ones group hierarchies, in regards to nationality, ethnicity, race, religion and class. For me, I have not ubiquitously rooted for the Americans in their competition. One can summarize my highest loyalties to be in regards to race; however, that is not really accurate. A more accurate umbrella would be that I am for the underdog. In head to head competition between black athletes, who I pull for has more to do with their social background and attitudes. This is why I rooted for the Jamaican, because his Pan African leanings were made evident. I tend to support those nations and individuals whose background is that of the underdog. Unfortunately, this leads me to be racial in my support most often, due to the circumstances of black people in this world.

Also, I must admit that when the national anthem is played for America, after an athlete wins the gold, and the flag is hoisted, I do not get all warm inside from pride. Here we are the richest nation on earth, with top notch training facilities. Other nations, such as those in Africa and the Caribbean, on the other hand are too poor create the condition conducive for their athletes to compete on the world stage. This is why the Kenyans and Ethiopians do so well in Distance running. That is probably the one sport that does not require special facilities and equipment. All one has to do is run, which is pretty affordable providing that you have enough food to eat to give you the calories to run.

Who were you rooting for?

August 22, 2004

Tabooing the Past

If I were to ask an Engineer how he arrived at his current job, he would likely answer with something superficial such as having had a contact, sending in his resume or impressing in the interview. While these facts may be true, it is not the greater truth, thus making it somewhat of a fallacy, via the omission of a continuum of other truths.

In reality, the way that the person likely landed the job is from the creation of the facts on his resume. Likely, he had to go to college and get a degree. Likely, he had to have a pretty descent high schooling to prepare him for college matriculation. Likely, he had to have someone instill in him the value and need for education. Likely, he had to have parents to provide him with an environment conducive to facilitating intellectual career aspirations…and so on and so forth.

Thus, one can see a continuum of actions and reactions the sum up to explain his current present reality of being a practicing Engineer at a company. How much one uses this continuum of actions and reaction to explain the present represents the degree of truth in their reasoning. Thus, in debating, the juxtaposition is not between truth and falsity, but rather, degrees of truth. Most people use truths in their arguments, but is a truth that represents the exception to the rule of the aggregate, equal to a truth the represents the general rule of the aggregate?

It is amazing, but not surprising, to me how most people dismiss the past. The past creates the present. Yet, there has been an conspiracy of like minded interest to turn the interjection of the past, to explain the present, into a taboo. It is similar to what is happening now with interjecting the accusation of racism upon those who show symptoms their of. Not surprisingly, it is generally the same group of people that are tying to make taboos out of both.

The reason that the past has become taboo is because the people or groups that currently hold power, don’t want people to remember just how they came into this power and who they hurt in the process. If one looks at many of the conflicts of the world today, they are issues most often concerning territory and boundaries. What is rarely mentioned, however, is that most of the borders and territories of the world were shaped by the European through their centuries of imperialism, militarism and colonization.

In the process of creating borders to serve the interest of European powers, homogenous groups of people were split apart and non homogenous people were grouped together, often fermenting divisions and rivalries that still plague these lands. Some were deprived of valuable rich territory. For example, much of the problems of the Middle East today were created from borders imposed by Britain after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and from the decision of Western Whites to create a state of Israel proper, where no such state was recognized in that territory at the time. Every since those actions a continuum of reactions have consistently been reverberating through the region, including Iraq annexation of Kuwait, which lead to the first Gulf war.

Of course, the issue of slavery, Jim Crow, the near extermination of the Natives of the America’s is a powerful motivation for making talk of the past taboo. Instead, people aligned with the elites like to employ “snap shot” reasoning. This reasoning is a one dimensional in that it simply takes a point in time, then use conjecture and not the past, to explain it. For example. The fact that the black poverty rate in America for blacks is 3 times the rate for whites is explained by taking a snap shot of statistics such as children born out of wedlock or poor educational performance relative to others.

What these people do not want to employ is the past record of events that culminated into the present. This could be called the “video” version of events in that it captures the all important time continuum and actions and reactions and causes and effects. This is totally illogical, if not disingenuous, given that we all know that the present is created from the events of the past. Thus, using the “snap shot” truth and omitting the “video” truth is a means of obfuscating the total truth, due to an agenda of personal interest. Every action produces a reaction, but many of the elites and their wannabe cronies want to propagate the belief that all the recorded wrongs of Americas past, has nothing to do with its current present.

August 21, 2004

A good question with an even better answer..

A question has been asked over on the “Blacks for Bush” Blog spot; Is the American president an Israeli shill or is he a Saudi shill? On the surface it seem like he can not be both but when we take a closer look we can easily conclude that he is a shill for each of them for different reasons and thus I respond to the questioned posed by “Blacks for Bush” by writing the message below.

There will be no need to decide which one he is a Shill for, he can be both without these two paths ever crossing one another or contradicting one another. Saudi Arabia produces as many so called terrorist if not more than any nation in that region but the Saudi regime are capitalist at heart and Islam is secondary to them. Thus although they have a disagreement with the creation of the rogue State of Israel they will not allow that to affect their capitalist aspirations.

The United States is beholding to Israel for different reasons than they are beholding to Saudi Arabia. Israel has an extremely powerful lobby that are backed and supported financially and intellectually by Jewish men and women in position of power in America. Couple that with the religious right that include many Negro-Cons and Neo-Cons who believe Israel should be protected because of something they read in the Bible and you have all the makings of why the U.S. continue to support the welfare state of Israel.

That said, the U.S. is beholding to these rogue nations for two very different reasons and those reasons does not contradict or cross paths. Think of it this way, Saudi Oil is crack and Bush beholding to Israel is marijuana. Bush is a crack head that likes to smoke marijuana; the same is true of his predecessors. The crack dealers do not like or care for the weed man and would love to see him destroyed but he knows that his biggest customer (crack head Bush) also loves the weed man and support the weed man by selling him weapons to defend himself. There is no way the crack dealer (Saudi)will allow his hatred for the weed man (Israel) to mess up his relationship with his biggest crack head (the U.S.) and thus the crack head (Bush) can deal with both of them without a problem from either of them although they do not like one another. So we need not decide who Bush is a Shill to because he can be both at the same time.

August 20, 2004

The law of supply and demand and the rise of the Negro Conservative

The law of supply and demand in a virtual free market
is very simple. It is simply a law that correlates the
concept of value with the give and take of the supply
of and demand for a commodity. Currently, as far as
the nation is concerned, there is a glut or over
supply of the so-called outspoken black liberal.
Indeed, it would be fair to say that the nation,
meaning the plurality group, (white America) sees the
black liberal as a dime for a dozen. In other words,
one has to be an extraordinarily intelligent,
articulate, charismatic and untainted in order to be a
black liberal to break into the ranks of the most

Contrarily, one would be lacking in the power of
observation if they did not note the promotion and
reward given to even the most intellectually and
charismatically constipated black conservatives, by
white conservatives and moderates. For example: The
non grammarian and barely audible Rev. Jesse Lee
Patterson. The reason that these individuals can get
so much attention and promotion in the electronic
media is simply from the fact that there is a big
demand for the Negro commodity who will speak out
against the Negro masses and their so-called liberal
leadership. In other words, “House Negroes” are in big
demand, like IT professionals were during the late

Like the IT field of the late 90’s, the supply of IT
professionals did not meet demand, which resulted in
many non-IT professionals converting to the profession
in order to get the promotion of salary and social
status. In the same way, many soulless Negroes
recognize the higher premium of reward and promotion
that comes with parroting a conservative ideology, as
opposed to parroting the traditional black liberal
ideology. Consequently, they gradually rationalize
making the switch, because the collective interest of
black peoples is much lower in their value hierarchy
than their own quest for individual promotion, status
and attention.

It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out how
the system works. Simply put; those who the system
promotes and rewards will in turn promote and reward
the system with its loyalty. This may not be an
absolute rule, but it is far greater than a general
rule as well. In light of this, the system of
conservatism is letting it be known that they are
offering rewards for the Negro who will speak out
against the masses of his or her own people, often, in
the process; parroting rhetoric that at its roots
implies a black inferiority doctrine. Indeed, you
would be correct in seeing this system of rewarding
and promoting intellectually and charismatically
constipated Negroes as the form of Affirmative Action
that they support, which is blatant hypocrisy. See the
rise of Clarence Thomas for a case study.

This is not to suggest that there are not black people
who truly believe in social conservatism as a
conclusion that they have come to independent of the
pull factor from white conservatism rewards. This is
also not to suggest that selling out is the only way
for blacks to rise and be promoted. However, it cannot
be denied that many blacks simply recognize that to be
promoted in certain circles, such as those seeking
rise in corporate America, that the adapting of
conservative ideology reduces the gravity to
ascendance. This is also true for whites as well.
Thus, in a nation that is becoming more and more
individualistic, it becomes easy for many to sell out
the black collective in exchange for personal
promotion. In the process, such individuals are often
coveted to speak the conservative rhetoric that would
get a white orator labeled a racist. The latter is the
prime benefit that the black social conservative
brings to the tables of white conservatism. In other
words, the blacks become the proxy middlemen and women
that allows base of white conservatives to promote a
doctrine of black inferiority, without the base being
labeled racist and white supremacist, due to their
black middlemen/women aka…House Negroes, Uncle Toms or
Benedict Arnolds…if you will.

Noah The African

August 19, 2004

Grouping to compete

Everything that everyone does is ultimately rooted in
the self preservation of ones interest and values. In
other words, everything that everyone does is selfish,
in that the choice or action is taken to maximize a
person’s interest and or values, culminating in a
reward. One can be seen as a Saint, as in the case of
Mother Teresa, for their apparent sacrifices they make
on behalf of others. However, the actions of Saints
are equally as selfish as those of callous sinners.
The only difference being their hierarchy of values
and subsequent rewards based upon choices emanating
from those values. This all works to the benefit of
the first law of nature, which is self preservation.

Now that we have established a selfish motive for
everything humans do, we must note the fact that
humans are a socially and economically interactive and
interdependent animal. Thus, it is the norm that our
interests are often at odds with the interest of some,
while in concert with the interest of others. This
invariably leads to the creation of competition and
alliances whose ultimate functionality is the
promotion and success of individual member’s interest.

If two or more males have an interest in one alpha
female, the natural resultant is a competition. If two
separate population groups expand to the borders of
the others territory, then a competition will result
over the land, because it is the land that is
providing the individuals from both groups the ability
to survive.

In light of all this, it should be fairly obviously as
to why we affiliate ourselves with groups. Everyone is
part of some group, either by choice, by birth or by
both. These groups then often become a way for
individuals to compete with other groups for the goal
of maximizing the individual interest of its members.
The reason being is that there is strength in numbers
and individuals often can further their individual
interest more effectively by joining with those of
similar interest and or needs. Also, an individual, by
virtue of birth and or choice, may be a member of
several different groups, some in conflict with
others. In such a case, that individual will rank the
memberships in order of their ability to promote
whatever the individual values most.

Our group memberships are a strategy designed to
promote the offensive and or defensive needs of
individuals against other competing human groups whom
we feel either threaten us or have something that we
covet. Consequently, we divide ourselves by nations
and borders, religion, political systems, economic
systems, political parties, ethnicity, race, tribe and
far lesser affiliations, mostly for the purpose
competing for the actualization or preservation of our
interest as individuals, which are shared by the

More often than not, our interest and values are
learned. Often we simply inherit them from our
families, communities and nations. It is often part
and parcel with socialization and acculturation via
emulation. Thus, more often than not, interest and
membership becomes self perpetuating through birth.
However, people do break the mode of their
environments training, but it is generally an
exception to the rule. Also, propaganda from a
powerful source can shape individuals beliefs and
values, by appealing to certain emotions that triggers
the need to become offensive or defensive to another

Not all groups are morally equivalent however. As I
mentioned before, some groups arise as a defensive
reaction to offensive actions by other groups. The
black struggle or the Pan African struggle cannot be
viewed in the same moral light as the Aryan or
skinhead movements. The former being the defensive
reaction to centuries of offensive racial oppression
and attacks from others, while the latter being a
movement to preserve the status gained from past
offensive attacks against others. In other words, one
is a movement to defend and uplift itself up from
inferior treatment and status, while the other is a
movement to preserve itself as a privileged superior
entity in juxtaposition. In spite of this huge
difference, people often try to draw a moral
equivalence between the two.

So, are these groupings and competition a good thing?
Yes and No. In nature, competition or resistance
produces advancement, through adaptation, mutation and
evolution. Thus, the absence of competition produces
stagnation. Hence, it can be argued that this division
and competition is actually advancing humanity (via
exploiting and harming humanity). However, “too” much
competition becomes destructive and ultimately
threatening to humanity. Therefore, competition needs
to be infused with its opposite phenomenon, which is
cooperation, in order to create the proper and most
efficient equilibrium for humanity.

Cooperation requires placing a high value on
collective interest. In order to increase the value on
collective interest of humanity, the trade off must
come from reducing the value and emphasis placed on
individual interest. The only way that this can be
done, since humans can only be selfish beings, is to
convince the masses that it is ultimately in their
best interest to do such, if they are interested in
the world that their descendants will inherit in the
future (fat chance?).

Ultimately too many competing groups (the natural
consequence of promoting individualism) and not enough
cooperating groups will sink humanity. A key aspect of
cooperation is that those with much need to help
promote those with the least ability to compete, even
though it may threaten the rank and holding of the
elites, who can currently only remain elite via the
juxtaposition with those with less.

Noah The African

August 18, 2004

Proving a Point....

In my earlier Blog entitled “the Republican Party and Poor Whites” I asked you the reader to:

“Take note of the language being used in the Senate Race in Illinois where the GOP has recruited a Negro name Alan Keyes to run against his Brother Obama Barak. Keyes and his supporters have stated several times already and we will hear it many more times that he (Keyes) hold more of what is considered “core Black values” than does Obama. Hence they want Black folk to vote for Keyes because he has social leanings as we do, but Black folk are not fools and we know morality and Black core values are not the things Keyes will be legislating,”

To further this point I will point you to a recent article written by the Negro-Con Armstrong Williams, where in he says not once but he mentions four times in one way or another that Obama social views is not that of the majority Black populace or he words it by saying the Black populace polling show us as having conservative values. If you take this and couple it with what the Negro-Con Walter Williams has said you can clearly understand what I mean when I say the republicans are trying to woo Black men and women to their party by trying to identify with us based on our social views, however as Walter Williams stated in his article about Socialism is Evil, Republicans like to give money to the rich and Democrats like to give money to the poor. This alone should awaken Black men and women on the scheme being run by the Republicans.

Furthermore, take the Kerry like senator candidate Alan Keyes who seems to be flip flopping more than his party say Kerry does. Keyes says he now support reparation in the form of Black men and women being exempt from federal taxation for a generation or two. This completely smacks everything the republican party stands for in the face and yet it also acknowledged that the Negro-Con Alan Keyes believes that redress is needed in the form of reparation and the only problem is how it should be handled.


August 17, 2004

A Negro-Con tells the truth...

A Negro-Con (TM Pending) has told the truth and exposed other Negro-Cons as being out of tune with the majority of Black people and those who seek upward mobility for Black men and women in America. In his recent article entitled “Socialism is evil” the Negro-Con Walter Williams states:

“Republicans and right-wingers support taking the earnings of one American and giving them to farmers, banks, airlines and other failing businesses. Democrats and left-wingers support taking the earnings of one American and giving them to poor people, cities and artists.”

In his attempt to tear down socialism he actually exposes what many of us have said about Republicans and Conservatism in America. These rich white elite men and women do not hate socialism as they would like for us to believe, they only hate socialism when it serves to lift up those who they see themselves in direct competition with and those who were it not for their state of poverty the Rich elitist could not claim to be such. You see the poor give definition to the rich, the rich need to have the poor around less they do not know where they are in life. This is a grand indictment of the Negro-Con, who has turned his and her back on Black folk in an effort to fit in and seek individual gain while appeasing and licking the boots of white folk. With the level of Poverty in Black communities all over America it is no wonder Black men and women vote primarily democratic if as this Negro-Con has said, the Democrats seek to give money to the poor and the cities the poor folk live in. What is it about the Negro-Con that makes him hate himself or herself and their people so much? It is indeed a phenomenon that I will continue to explore here on this site and everywhere I post my thoughts.

The Negro-Con love to feed Black men and women that bootstraspism theory but they love to give money to the white rich elite or those who not only have bootstraps but are the ones who make it impossible for the poor to actually pull themselves up by their bootstraps. The Negro-Cons by admission of another Negro-Con has sold their souls and turned their back on Black men and women. We will continue to expose the Negro-Con and those they have sold their soul to.


The fallacy of capitalism

A great fallacy of our time is born from the
propaganda of our economic system. Capitalism is an
intrinsically expansion seeking system that markets
itself based upon the rewards of profit and a win-win
resultant for participants. What makes this marketing
fallacious is born from the fact that the concept of
profit is an anomaly to nature’s laws and the fact
that all competition based phenomenon always produces
win-lose resultant.

People will correctly lament, in capitalism defense,
that it is the most productive economic system that
currently manifest and will use the relative poor
state of its competitors as proof. However, its
success at producing wealth is not in question. One
could go out and commit robberies to acquire income to
convert to wealth. If they succeed, one can then argue
that robbery or criminality is a successful
methodology or system of uplift. Thus, the issue is
not in regards to producing success, but rather the
net result of the activity on the humans contacted.

Capitalism is predicated and motivated by the concept
of profit. Profit is not a natural phenomenon in
nature. In fact, there never can be profit in nature
when everything is summed up. In other words, there is
“no net gain” in nature, because there are no net
gains in closed system or virtual closed systems such
as the earth, for all intents and purposes. For
everything that is gained within a closed system,
something else must be lost as the offset. This is
backed up by the first and second laws of
thermodynamics. The former is the law that says that
one can never get more energy out than energy put in.
The latter being the law that says that you cannot
even get the same degree of energy back as that which
you put in.

What happens in nature is that things “shift” from one
form to another and from one time and place to
another, but there is never a net gain after all the
reactions are summed up from the action. It is this
“shifting” that people confuse with profit and
win-win. It is confused as profit or win-win due to
the fact that the tradeoff or opposite effect is
hidden, thereby creating the impression that there are
no losers or tradeoff. In the past, the trade off was
obvious, as in the case of slavery. One group of
people lifted themselves up via putting others down,
in a form of “seesaw” economics. That becomes morally
reprehensible for a supposed Christian people. Thus, a
more hidden and clandestine manifestation of “seesaw”
economics exist today. Furthermore, many of the trade
offs are not real-time, but manifest in the future,
thus creating a win-win reality only in the context of
the present.

In essence profit is simply getting more out of an
interaction than an entity has put in, which again is
an anomaly to natures laws. Most forms of profiting
comes from the resultant of combining human energies
into a “potluck”, where the host is allowed to come
out with more than put in. The interaction is
generally between owners of capital, workers and
consumers, each providing a dish to the “potluck”, but
some consuming less than the equivalent of their
input, due to others consuming more than the
equivalent of theirs. This is accepted because each
entity voluntarily enters into these agreements of
unequal exchanges and do get something in return…just
not what they should have gotten in an equal exchange
or barter.

Our economic system is also a competition driven
phenomenon. All competition based phenomenon have the
effect of producing winners and losers. Rank and
status therefore become paramount to players in the
competitive game. Think of the NFL. The fact that
there are teams with great records is offset by the
fact that other teams have poor records. In the closed
system of the NFL, total wins must always equal total
loses. Everyone cannot go undefeated, thus, there is
no possibility mathematically that everyone can be
wealthy in terms of having more wins than loses.
Win-Win cannot exist outside of complete equality of
records, thus it is also lose-lose as much as it is
win-win because there is not separation or rank. Also,
the only way to create parity is to reduce those who
are overly wealthy in victories simultaneously
reducing those who are poor in losses.

When we look at the problems of the world today, most
are the consequence or tradeoff effect emanating from
past acts that created profit and wealth for people in
the past. Not only just in regards to colonization,
slavery, imperialism, militarism and other people
conflicts, however. Today, we are embarking upon an
ecological crisis of global warming that emanates
largely from the industrial revolution and era that
has allowed humans to live more comfortable and
creating much wealth in the process. The effect of our
human activity is mostly conserved for the future in
regards to its effect on nature and ecology. We humans
have quite possible written a check that our
descendants will not be able to cover.

In conclusion, in light of the above, things will only
get worse in this world from the spread of capitalism
as it manifest in the USA and the USA has begun its
descent from its zenith as capital seeks the path of
least resistance, which is cheap labor cost. Thus, the
USA success and high wages has become its course and
the nation are about to become the victims of itself.

Noah The African

August 16, 2004

The progress at the cross road.

The struggle for advancement of the descendants of
trans-Atlantic slave trade, here in America, has
reached a crucial period of inertia and will require
greater effort going forward to complete the journey
to equality. One of the greatest threats to the
struggle comes from the successes of the struggle.
When the achievement of success for some becomes a
detrimental to success for others, then the struggle
is in a quagmire. Ultimately, it is the juxtaposition
and struggle between individualism and collectivism
that may decide our ultimate fate.

With so many African Americans finally reaching the
middle class, far too many people, both black and
white, have concluded that the struggle against the
external forces of past and present racism and
discrimination are over. Suburban whites, which
represent a plurality of the white masses, are seeing
more blacks enter their communities than ever. They
also tune into network television and see black
doctors, lawyers and Engineers in TV roles. They see a
black secretary of state and a key black female
cabinet advisor to the president. And of course they
also see the countless black millionaire athletes, not
to mention music industries black millionaires.

In light of such observations, it becomes harder to
digest the thought that blacks are indeed still in a
struggle to be rehabilitated and repaired from years
of racial oppression. If you ask most whites, the vast
majority is under the impression that equality of
opportunity has been achieved and internal and not
external forces hold those who do not progress down.
Not only that, many blacks that managed to rise out of
poverty and integrate has begun to assimilate the
class warfare ideology of the white middle class.
Unfortunately, race and class is part and parcel and
thus, blacks cannot attack the lower class without
attacking their race as well.

As more blacks make it to the middle class, the less
need black people see for a black struggle and
consciousness and the less programs, such as
Affirmative Action, are seen as valid by whites. The
ubiquitous question among whites seems to center on
reconciling how some blacks make it an others do not.
There seems to be this assumption that there is a
monolithic black condition that weighs equally upon
all black people. Thus, when many make it out of
poverty, it is assumed that the others had equal
chance, had they simply made the choices of those who
made it. Hence, the problem is not past or present
racism in their eyes, but rather, the inability of
these individuals to make the right life choices. This
is the rationalization of a growing number of blacks

Of course, these rationalizations are self-serving.
Looking down upon others has always been a means of
looking up or elevating our own self-image. Every time
we talk about what others are not, we are exalting
what we are, indirectly. It is a means for people to
imply their superiority without explicitly stating
such. For many assimilated blacks, they see themselves
as being individuals who are exceptions to the rule of
other blacks, who had the strength to make all the
right choices and escape the ghetto, while others were
weak. They seem to have little problem accepting the
conclusion that blacks seem to disproportionately make
the wrong life choices as compared to others, which
implies some type of black inferiority of reasoning
and or self control.

Its tantamount to suggesting that because many
soldiers have served in Iraq without being killed or
injured, that all the soldiers in Iraq who were killed
or injured somehow made bad choices that the others
did not make. However, people seem able to see the
obvious in that just because you are in the same
environment does not mean external events effect
everyone the same. There are many variables that make
for different outcomes, including luck. The same is
true for the blacks that have not managed to rise up
from poverty and the legacy of discrimination. They
should not be looked upon as causing their own poverty
any more than the soldiers killed in Iraq should be
faulted for their own deaths, based upon their
choices. Of course, there are likely cases where a
soldier made the wrong decision, resulting in death or
injury and that is also true of people who remain
trapped in poverty. However, it is the general rule
that represents the truth and not the exceptions to
the rule.

We must also understand the fact that whomever the
system rewards and promotes will generally and in turn
promote and reward the system. This is how power
maintains itself in a system such as ours. It has to
create a hierarchy. When many people make it to the
upper social strata, they seek to fit in. In order to
fit in they must assimilate to the ideology of that
stratum, as a general rule. That stratum is highly
polarized in their views concerning the underclass.
Thus, when many blacks reach the boardrooms and
exclusive clubs of corporate elites, they can only be
promoted within those circles if and when they
assimilate the ideologies that protect those circles
beliefs and ideologies. The system will not allow the
promotion to power of those with ideologies that
threaten the status of the elites.

The conspiracy that thus takes place takes place not
via people getting together in a room to plan how to
keep blacks and the poor down, rather, it happens via
promotion and rewards. Quite simply, to move up the
ladder, as a general rule, at least in the corporate
world, one has to have a certain type of mentality and
ideology. If that mentality and ideology conforms to
the goals of the systems elites, then the system
promotes and rewards such an individual, if not, the
individual does not progress as rapidly or at all. It
is by this conspiracy that most corporate elites are
conservative. Thus, as the system rewards and promotes
them and they in turn promote and protect the system.
Most people do not even know that they are being
rewarded or held back by this conspiracy that manifest
via promotion.

The ultimate question for blacks should not just be
our position within the system, but an examination of
the virtue of the system itself. If more blacks were
allowed to be slave masters in the pre civil war
South, having white and black slaves too, I am sure
more blacks would have been able to find success
within that system and hence there would have been
more black supporters of it. Consequently, I fear that
black people are not as much in opposition to
injustice or systems of injustice, as much as we are
simply upset about being the disproportionate victims
of it. As long as we are allowed to be greater
benefactors of injustice, we seem to have fewer
problems with it. Now that blacks are “making it” in
the system, they no longer question its inherent flaws
and resultant inequalities of it. As a result, such
black individuals discredit the needs for programs to
attack the effects of an injustice system.

In conclusion, individualism is eroding black
collectivism. Thus, as long as individuals can receive
promotion and reward in the system, his or her
individual interest usurps the collective interest of
black people. Consequently, there attempted
assimilation into the “main stream”, which do not
support the needs of the black collective, thus goes
to work against the black collective, which produces
no net gain for black people…despite the growing
success of individual blacks.

Noah The African

Change of Name...

First and Foremost I would like to welcome my Brother Noah the African to Black Thought and Black Introspection. Brother Noah will be a contributor to this Blog and I look forward to his participation and his writings that will further the conversation sparked by Black thought and Black introspection. We are not going to make this a place to only discuss the problems plaguing Black men and women, but make no mistake about it; we will let you know what they are and how they came to be, however at the same time we will offer real world solutions.

This Blog new name is Black Thought and Black Introspection. You will also notice I call this an unauthorized Blog on Black thought and Black Introspection, this is done to let you the reader know we have not been authorized nor do we seek authorization from anyone to give our opinion on the causes and solutions to the problems that plague our people. As my brother has stated, we are not owners of the truth, it belongs to humanity and we are here to give you the truth, you can accept it or reject it, but we will stand behind it unless a greater truth is proven to exist.

August 15, 2004

The Republican Party and Poor Whites

The Republican Party would like to do to Black men and women in America what they have successfully done to poor white men and women in America. The Republican Party uses their brain power and funding to appeal to one particular issue a people have or hold dear and they latch on to it like a pit bull. In the case of poor whites; the Republican Party appeals to their hidden and overt racism and their over zealous Religious beliefs. When we take an honest look at Republican politicians political beliefs versus their social beliefs we will see that their political agenda is one that caters to the rich, and they save their social beliefs and agenda for poor whites because they know rich folk are the people who have no concern for morality; their morality is based on the bottom line.

The Republican Conservative movement knows that their political philosophy does not appeal to Black men and women thus they are feverously trying to appeal to Black men and women through our social beliefs which they know has always been more conservative than not, but we are not as stupid as poor whites who allow their social leanings to be used to sell them on a political agenda that does absolutely nothing for them. Take note of the language being used in the Senate Race in Illinois where the GOP has recruited a Negro name Alan Keyes to run against his Brother Obama Barak. Keyes and his supporters have stated several times already and we will hear it many more times that he (Keyes) hold more of what is considered “core Black values” than does Obama. Hence they want Black folk to vote for Keyes because he has social leanings as we do, but Black folk are not fools and we know morality and Black core values are not the things Keyes will be legislating, and the people of Illinois knows that a fool from out of town who was recruited in a desperate attempt by a party that has fallen apart in the state of Illinois can not properly represent them or their political leanings.

Bush with his faith based programs is trying to go after the Black Church. Every one knows the Black church is more than just a house of worship in the Black community, The Black church is a structural institution in the Black community that has been on the front line of many battles Black men and women have engaged in and always have provided a place where God fearing by Nature Black men and women could find some solace. Bush is trying to use the Black church and Black men and women belief in God to woo us to his political party in the same way the Republican Party has done with all those so-called Bible belt men and women who for the most part are pure hypocrites. These poor white folk belief in God is being used against them by the Republican party and if you listen to many of the Negro men and women that call themselves conservative they too have allowed their religious beliefs to be used to woo them to a party that is the Party the southern Dixiecrats found to be the party that best represented their beliefs. The Negro Conservative is fully funded by those rich white conservatives who give them instructions on what to say to poor Black folk. Take note Black people, Negro Cons will only seek to appeal to our social beliefs and religious beliefs but if talk is centered around the politics of economics even they will admit the republican party cater to the rich and are some of the most immoral people on the earth.

August 14, 2004


I welcome all those who wish to leave comments on anything I write, however if you want to debate something I said with me, I invite you to AfricanAmerica, where you can start a thread debating anything you find debatable in my Blog.

Defining Negro, American Black and American-African

In all of my writings that will appear on this page you will notice the use of words like Negro, American Black, and possibly American-Africans. When you see these words being used, know that they are not referencing the average Black man or woman; these terms are meant to describe a behavior if not a mentality.

The use of the word Negro is a throw back of sorts to a time when Black folk were scared to death of white folk and tried our best to win their approval. So when you see in my writings where I have referred to a so-called Black person as a Negro, know that I am describing their behavior or thought process concerning a particular philosophy or ideology, more than likely a political philosophy and ideology. The other two terms; American Black and American-African will be used to describe those Negro men and women who refuse to self identify as Black or African first. In most cases their refusal to self identify as Black or African first has to do with the history of the Black man and woman in America and in the Diaspora. Black folk have been running from our history for years, we refuse to watch movies that depict what happened to us as it happened, we refuse to read books that speak about the horrors we under went in this nation and in the Diaspora and most of all many of us hate ourselves and try to self identify as anything other than Black. When this behavior is expressed in Black folk in America it is usually from those who suffer from Stockholm Syndrome, they have fallen in love with our captor and now do his or her bidding willingly, they are ashamed of their African roots and cling on tightly to anything that may help them self identify as anything other than Black or African.

As I see it, being a Black Conservative is the number one qualifier for any of the terms above, the Negro men and women who call themselves Black Conservatives are men and women who have accepted a doctrine that is diametrically opposed to the needs and wants of Black men and women. They have chosen to align themselves with white folk that have a philosophy that appeals to the worst kind of people in all of America, the white racist. Whether they admit it or not, the same men and women that are voting for that openly racist Republican in Tennessee that have said if elected he will work towards keeping the “less favored races” from reproducing are the same people that are voting for Bush and the same people the Negro conservatives align themselves with. Make no mistake about it, I abhor the Negro Conservative and believe as Bill Maxwell believe;

“By all standards, some creatures are just plain strange, making us do double takes because their compositions or habits or appearances defy our sense of logic and our way of viewing reality. Take the wildebeest, the warthog, the hyena, the brown pelican, the Shar-Pei. These animals, seemingly wrought by committee, make us laugh or shake our heads. Another such creature, of the human kind -- and perhaps the strangest of all -- is the black Republican.”

August 13, 2004

Harass and Arrest

So tonight, one of my friends tells me about a local Bike Club that will be meeting at a local restaurant to chill and relax. I decide I will role through to see what the brothers are up to since it was their first time meeting in this spot. I arrive and quickly notice a group of young men and women just talking shooting the breeze, my friend notices me and comes over to my car to greet me. I get out and we start talking and as we are talking I start asking question about the different bike clubs that were there. Well in the course of our conversation, I point out to my friend that the Police will have a problem with this and will probably come by and harass the men and women that are out here. I stated to him that instead of sending someone over to greet and meet with all the men and women over here, the police will come by to cause problems in an otherwise peaceful gathering. After about forty minutes I decided to leave. Well when I get home I get a message from my friend stating that what I said would happen, happened. The CHP (California highway patrol) came by the gathering and started looking for problems. The copper was on a bike himself, and thought it necessary to ride up and down where all the bikes are parked looking for expired tags.

The police often wonder why Black men and women do not trust them; they will say that a few bad apples should not determine how all police men and women are viewed. However, it is little things like this and the numerous other things that the Police do that cause distrust of them. This gathering was a peaceful gathering; half the men and women that were out there are in the Military! This means nothing to the CHP, their job is to harass and arrest versus the old tired motto protect and serve. This gathering of young men and women decided to disperse rather than deal with police harassment and as in most cases of police harassment, no one was arrested and no one was ticketed but I am sure these same coppers are out looking for more men and women to harass or looking for another peaceful gathering to break up.

Governor McGreevy and White Skin Privilge

As we are bombarded with all this talk about Governor McGreevy being gay and given his gay lover a job, the one thing that seems to be ignored is that this is a classic case of white skin privilege. Here we have McGreevy given another white male a job that paid 110K a year and this man was so unqualified that the FBI refused to brief him. If this is not white skin privilege I do not know what is, and it should be called what it actually is, White Skin privilege.

The return of Faheem

Well it is about time I put my thoughts in one place. I post my thoughts all over the web on various messageboards but now this will be the home of most of my thoughts including those that never make it to any messageboards. I would like to welcome you to Faheem's Blog.

Black Sites and Forums