Georgia, Georgia, no peace I find... (Originally posted 8/17/08)

Dear friends,

When Ray Charles sang "Georgia on my mind", the listener cannot imagine any other place than from where some sweet Southern peaches originate - as well as, "strange fruit", unfortumately. Certainly, in recent years, Aaron Neville has "covered" Brother Ray's classic more than effectively.

However, there is another sound about Georgia, on the minds of millions, right now, that is becoming more familiar these days. It comes from Eastern Europe. And, it is from a country - not a state. Not long ago, it was part of the Soviet Union. Now, after the dispersement of that communist federation which started in Russia, it seems, at least to me, that Russians may be moving back towards the direction that their original founders intended...

Yet, one of the problems that average citizens have, when they try to understand recent events, is: the entire US educational system, its teachers and professors, as well as many of our journalists and politicians, especially since the late-Reagan era, have been analyzing the experiences of the Russians as the latter have simply gotten smart and embraced capitalism. This is the lie or sheer naivete that all of the abovementioned have been claiming.

A genuine revolution is a process. It is not an event that concludes with the change of the personalitiies who represent a government. The North American Civil War, almost one hundred years after the "founding" of this nation, by the so-called American Revolution, proves that simple truism adequately. Let us face it. There were only thirteen colonies after our forebears ran out the British rulers, and they were largely in what is now called the "Northeast Corridor". However, unlike in the beginning of our nation's history, most of the territory that was the United States, seventy years later, was in the South.

Additionally, durng that time, the enslaved of African descent had outgrown those of European descent, in the South. It was not like that, at the founding of the nation and before, when it has been estimated that 75% of the Europeans who came here did so as "indentured servants". That is, those people sold themselves into slavery, usually for a period of four years, in order to pay the transportation cost to the ship's captain who brought them here.

As a matter of fact, in the Commonwealth History of Massachusetts, Vol.1, it is pointed out about early New Englanders, including the famous "Pilgrim" group, that landed at Cape Cod, that there was a small servile population among them. “Both Indian and Negro, besides white servants were bound out to a master for a term of years and received no wages. Of these there were a few in the Pilgrim group.”

Now, since there was no one here to accept the aforementioned Pilgrims other than the Early American Natives (so-called Indians), then that means that the slavemasters were aboard the Mayflower too. So it is obvious that the lie that our schools deliberately pass on to American children, generation after generation, about the "Pilgrims" coming here for religious freedon, is no different than the lie that the 1917 revolution in Russia was a conclusive event.

But what about revolutions? The intellectual giant Franz Fanon confided (paraphrased here), "I don't trust revolution. Revolution means fire. And I don't trust fire, because it is too difficult to control." I agree with our belated brother. I myself was once a revoluutionary, as a member of the Black Panther Party. I know, firsthand, the "fire" that revolutionnary activities make happen, in any given society.

However, for the past three decades, I have embraced conservative innovation, instead of revolution, and, thus, consider myself a conservative innovationist - not a revolutionary. Of course, by conservative, I do not mean what so many of these reactionary right-wingers, so-called Christian fundamentalists and their ilk who means-spiritedly promote "going back" to the period in our history when injustice for many was rampant. Rather, my understanding of the word conservative means that one takes informed risks. In other words, I do not just jump into anything, without careful thought and consideration. As well, I am an innovationist, in the literal sense, inasmuch as I choose to vigorously engage new ideas, that are based upon real experiences, as well as experimentation, in order to improve that which is already established; in other words, that which already exists.

In any case, the forward motion of the process that is the Russian Revolution was interrupted and made a "counter-revolution" by the likes of Mikhail Gorbachev and his supporters. But others have done that before, and to a worse extent. A man named Joseph Stalin, in fact, changed the whole direction of the initial process that was started by Vladmir Lenin, Leon Trotsky,, and their more faithful (than Stalin) Bolshevik comrades. To be sure, men like Stalin and, later, Gorbachev (colluding with multi-national corporations), even though counter-revolutionists, were/are part of the revolutionary "process" as well. Still, it seems, at least to me, that, today, the Russian people may have decided to take a different course than they did during the Gorbachev years. And so, the process (i.e., the Russian Revolution) continues...

Therefore, meaningless tough talk by George Bush, and his mouthpiece, Condoleeza Rice, will not change the fact that, aside from the reality that the Russian Revolution has not ended, the United States has its hands full already. I, therefore, suspect that it would be wise for the Bush administration to keep talking tough, but doing nothing. Right now, the game that the Bushies are playing, with their tough talk, is not much different than the incessant posturing and pontificating that we see between the "Democrats" and "Republicans" of the US Congress amongst themselves.

Moreover, we are dealing with two bodies (Russia's government and that of the US) who, under no circumstances, will engage one another militarily. Besides, many Americans are already asking: Why is it wrong for the Russians to invade a country but not the US? In other words, with unconscionable greed, at the expense of US soldiers and our tax dollars, the oil man Bush's administration has continued allowing: 1) The useless invasion of Afghanistan. 2) The yet-to-be defined "War on terror". 3) The "oil grab" in Iraq - along with that country's colonization by the US; and 4) An Iranian nuclear program for which the Russians will surely provide capacity if the president and the US Congress become too belligerent and send our courageous young warriors into the Georgia conflict. (And I am sure that Israel shudders at that thought.)

The United States needs to seek a different course. Perhaps, if the Bush administration considers joining with other nations, not as the usual "bully", but as a true partner, they may be able to gain enough support to make Russia back down. Nevertheless, with Russia positioned inside of Georgia at present, there are cries being made, by some, for the US to become involved and stop Russia from advancing further into Georgian territory. However, at least to me, the Russians have more to gain, in terms of their citizens backing them, than the Bushies do. When are the American people going to get tired of the lies and get rid of the Bushes, the McCains, the Clintons, and the rest of those to whom Brother Malcolm X referred as being nothing more than "Jesse James, Frank James, and the what-you-ma-call-it brothers"?

This whole concern for Georgia is more than just a huge contradiction for the US. Let us not forget that 19 Saudis invaded this country with plane-bombs, murdered thousands of people, injured tens of thousands more, and destroyed many billions of dollars worth of property, along with causing thousands of businesses to close permanently. Yet, not one hair on one head of any person from the oil-rich Saudi Arabia has been touched. Puh-leez. Still, President Bush, who himself refuses to set a timetable for when US troops wil leave Iraq, even though that is what the Iraqis want, says, "The United States stands with the democratically elected government of Georgia and insists that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia be respected." Right.

G. Djata Bumpus