Do We Need Sexual Liberation for all, or "Gay" Liberation for a few?

“Moreover, and paradoxically, the “spirit” of sexism - the euphemism for Male Supremacy, is male homosexuality.”

Dear friends,

The Gay Liberation Movement which was actually endorsed first, on a national level, by the Black Panther Party, as I remember, around the early spring of 1971, today, is not the same movement, by any stretch of the imagination, as the one that we supported back then. Likewise, neither is its Women's Liberation counterpart that would officially establish itself as a force, much to the dismay of many, if not most, men, during the summer of 1971, when Black activists like Fannie Lou Hamer, Myrlie Evers, and U.S. Representative Shirley Chisholm, along with others like Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan, and Bella Abzug founded the National Women's Political Caucus (NWPC). We (the Black Panther Party) vigorously supported that group just mentioned, as well.

Unfortunately, the leadership of both the Gay and Women's Liberation Movements in this country started “digressing” as opposed to “progressing”, within a couple of years, after losing their control to, for the most part, mean-spirited European American women, calling themselves “lesbians”, whose agenda had nothing to do with liberating anyone.

Oddly enough, it has been the specter of Male Supremacy that has been at the heart of these two movements becoming misdirected away from “liberation”, and, instead, being trivialized as, for instance, with women - “equal pay for equal work” - and for so-called “gays”, gay marriage. (By the way, who in this society has marriage equality?)

Moreover, and paradoxically, the “spirit” of sexism - the euphemism for Male Supremacy, is male homosexuality. Therefore, at least to me, it is, at best, insincere for either gay men or lesbians to proclaim to be sharing similar paths, let alone goals. If that’s not true, then why is that, perhaps, the most common lament by gay guys is: I don’t trust anything that bleeds for a week and doesn’t die. (By the way, a number of non-human animals bleed longer and more frequently than female humans...smh)

Additionally, whereas the original Women's Liberation Movement confronted Male Supremacy head on, the earlier-mentioned “lesbians” usurped that movement, as well as the Gay Liberation one, long ago. Then, they distanced themselves from the large presence of the African American pioneers who were mentioned earlier and their sisters - great artists/educators like Barbara Love, Nicki Mathis, Toni Cade Bambara, Sonya Sanchez, Nikki Giovanni, Audre Lorde, hundreds of Panther sisters, and so many others. Does anyone hear White Supremacy? Euphemistically, it is called racism, And, in fact, it is the racist arrogance of Europeans and their offshoots in the Americas that makes them trivialize the centuries-long oppression and exploitation of African American people, particularly, by comparing the plight of so-called gays to our circumstances.

Therefore, another problem is: In a socially-stratified society like ours, one can be a member of an oppressor group and an oppressed group at the same time. the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill debacle proved that point quite adequately. Likewise, males and females who call themselves both "gay" and "white" fit that bill. Consequently, again, in their racist arrogance, such "white" people trivialize our historical struggle for freedom, justice, and equality, as being analogous to two males piercing and thrusting their erections inside each other's anuses as if they are a "loving" pair, thus deserving of the same respect as heterosexual couples, when it is actually an expression of power and sexual greed in its extreme form, which itself is also, at best, a form of voluntary rape.

So, instead of strengthening the recognition of the need for all of us to have sexual freedom, the Gay Liberation Movement became the Gay Rights Movement and ceased to recognize the connection between the various cultural institutions in our country such as those of religion, the mainstream media and our schools, in relation to how they tie in with the overwhelming majority of Americans being sexually-repressed (especially those who call themselves “homosexual”).

Considering all that has been mentioned thus far, both movements have become little more than silly petty-bourgeois causes that do not recognize the fact that it is, essentially, the lack of appreciation for our very “human” identity as sexual beings that allows females to be treated, in a variety of ways, that males would never accept for themselves. In fact, the multi-billions of dollars porn industry recognizes males as sexual beings, but females as sexual objects.

Still, it is the disallowing of the right of females to be fully human, due to the fact that, from birth, for the most part, their own female elders brainwash them into believing their destinies are best served in relation to how skilled they are at deferring to equally brainwashed males (who have so foolishly deluded themselves into thinking that they are "superior" to anyone or anything) that is the cause of this whole situation. That’s the real deal! It is not simply a matter of demanding “equal pay for equal work”.

Proof: Named Steve Harvey, an African American, semi-literate, self-hating buffoon who makes Steppinfetchit look like Malcolm X, recently had a best-selling book called “Act like a Lady-Think like a Man”. Ouch!

The worst part of all that just mentioned is: both African- and European American women purchased such idiocy. [It’s funny. I doubt that any reputable publisher would have let a European American male have a book with such a disgusting title.] Moreover, I remember, during the Black Consciousness Era (roughly 1965 - 85), when speaking to Black men who had just moved Up South to places like Philly, NYC, and Boston from Down South (places like Baltimore, ATL, and Houston), it was not uncommon to hear such fellows advise, “Man, you gotta think like the white man.” Not to put any brothers from the South in the same category, Harvey, obviously of the same pedigree as those aforementioned Black men, somehow, saw a similar solution for all women. Wow!

At any rate, issues like abortion are only given recognition in the context of anti- and pro-, because women are not considered to be sexual beings - as men are. Worse yet, and unfortunately, in their intelligent response of feeling resentment towards Male Supremacy, far too many women, especially middle-aged European American ones, feeling that they are no longer part of the personality market, conveniently, have declared themselves to be “lesbians”, a totally reactionary stance against human progress that has nothing to do with sexuality, much less liberation.

In fact, I have found few things more humorous, but pathetic, than to see female European American Octogenarians holding signs at so-called “Pride” parades that read: I am a lesbian. What? Huh? When was the last time that that person had sex with someone else, of either gender?

Still, many argue that they do not "choose" to be gay; they just are. It is not a matter of behavior, they say. First of all, aside from the fact that a proposition cannot be proof of itself, behavior is anything that we do. Period. It involves a "choice" that people make. For instance, the greatest natural urges are those that remind us that we are hungry and/or thirsty. In our society, unless one lives in abject poverty in a desert or on the hills, s/he, usually, has access to, at least, water - whether clean or dirty. To be sure, the "choice" to eat and/or drink, is a wise one, since without consuming nutrients of some sort in periodic intervals a person would succumb.

Another strong "natural" urge is the sexual one. Yet, no one needs another person or outside element like food or drink to satisfy that frustration. Everyone has the ability to solve that problem by himself or herself – and everyday, billions do. Therefore, said one makes a "choice" to go to someone else in hopes of having that person or persons join in the sexual activity. Unfortunately, this urge, because it is so strong and can be satisfied, often, at so little cost - if any, has had a great deal to do with both power and sexual greed becoming the basis for sexual/social relationships in this society.

Of course, "choice" requires a conscious decision rooted in "will, judgment, and commitment". After all, one cannot "naturally" feel a certain way towards a potential sexual partner. Not even prostitutes take on any "John". Those who do are, unfortunately, at least, sometimes, the ones who are murdered.

Nevertheless, regarding one's "sexual" orientation, what difference does the gender, so-called "race", income level or any other orientation make, if, once you are with the type of person to whom you claim to be "oriented", either you wish that you weren't there - or s/he wishes that YOU weren't there?

In other words, can the complexities of creating mature personal relationships be trivialized so easily? In fact, other than some type of "tattle-tale" or "kiss-n-tell" revelation, how does one know what anyone has done sexually, or whether or not a person is "gay"? Even then, rumor is not enough, since a person does not have any idea what has happened with another sexually, unless s/he witnessed the act. Besides, due to the tug-of-war interactions that often happen in the bedrooms in any society, who knows what went down? Dig?

Sexual preference? We already have a name for such people. We call them rapists. One does not have sex with whom s/he prefers. Rather, a whole set of interactions must occur, approved consensually, by all parties involved. Otherwise., there is violation going on which, at that point, falls within the purview of law enforcement.

And then there are those, particularly males, who insist that they are "a woman inside of a man's body". This is a serious mental health issue. However, there are low-life surgeons, the descendants of the pre-legal abortion butchers, who will provide such psychotic individuals with "counseling", then an operation that gives the latter an artificial vagina, for example The problem with that is: The surgeon never informs the "patient", beforehand, that what distinguishes a woman from a man is not a vagina, but her monthly periodicity (although I must qualify that some females do not menstruate). No man can ever imagine what it feels like to menstruate. Such mistreatment of the patient's psychosis is in no small measure due to the fact that, for the most part, the US health care industry - one of the very worst in the world - mostly recognizes "physical" - not "mental" health. Did someone say "the market"?

At any rate, generally, it can be said that the inability to share erotic love with someone of the other sex comes largely from either a lack of ability to be a loving person or fear and mistrust. Additionally, erotic love is, sometimes, combined with either brotherly or sisterly love. Psychologically, that makes many homosexual relationships a form of incest. Moreover, as social relationships presently stand, in this society, most of the people pushing the gay agenda are women, particularly, European American ones - who call themselves "lesbians". While women as a whole justly resent men for society's patriarchy and sexism, it should be remembered that those same two evils exist and are perpetuated by so-called "gay" men as well. As a matter of fact, that's why, as I stated earlier, I believe that the spirit of sexism is male homosexuality.

Nevertheless, it appears that what sometimes occurs when two women, for example, sit around and commiserate with each other about what men have done to them or two men cry on each others' shoulders about what women have done to them, before long, one person ends up putting her or his face in the other one's lap. To be sure, that type of action breaks social custom. Worse yet, when people are breaking social customs, in order for such behavior to proliferate, the practitioners must necessarily develop obsessive and perverted habits, in order to motivate themselves and justify their very being. Otherwise, the aforementioned practitioners will cease the behavior, having no incentive to continue it.

In his now famous manifesto called "Letter from Birmingham Jail", the great Dr. King wrote, in part, " In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self-purification; and direct action." None of this ever happens with the so-called Gay Rights Movement. In fact, regarding their claim of being "homosexual", dialogue never happens, in any form. Instead, gay “pride” parades and other pathetic and obnoxious activities are thrust upon the public. We are simply told to accept this group, without any recognition or respect for the rest of the community. The so-called homosexual community is not a "community within a community". Rather, it is people who want to sit on both sides of the fence, when it comes to "inclusion".

Finally, those who oppose "gay culture", as it were, are personally attacked and childishly lambasted with a kind of moral terrorism, as gays use words and phrases such as "homophobia" and "mob rule". Also, gays use phrases like "straight allies". In other words, we have a national security issue here, since a certain amount of the population is at war with the rest of us. Gay violence has surfaced in New York City where, a few years back, a group of four women who call themselves "lesbians" brutally attacked a man, and have since been convicted of the heinous crime. There was even talk about a Korean American young man who murdered 32 people, at Virginia Tech, as claiming to be a tortured homosexual. Not a peep, about either incident just mentioned has been denounced by the "gay" community. The reason for their silence, at least to me, is due to the fact that their so-called Gay Rights Movement is not about sexual liberation at all. Rather, it is about sexual repression and destruction of the commonweal. Peace.

G. Djata Bumpus Read full post

The Prison/Industrial Complex (originally posted 10/2010)

“The fastest growing form of incarceration in the United States is immigration detention…”
Dear friends,

In the past, I’ve written about the Crime Industry. Well, just as 19th Century oil conglomerates would be the predecessors of today’s Automotive/Aerospace/Oil Complex, the aforementioned Crime Industry has led to te development of the “Prison/Industrial Complex”.

To be sure, this all keeps us aware of the reality that, in a society where our values are a reflection of the market, instead of vice versa, new markets must constantly be created in order to feed the insatiable greed of the market as it now stands.

In any case, on the link below is a Website that provides some very important takes on the durrent role of prisons in our particular advanced political economy - or process of social reproduction, as it were. Please check it out.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.diversityinc.com/article/8063/The-Prison-Industrial-Complex-Biased-Predatory-and-Growing/
Read full post

A True Warrior in African American History

>"At about 3 a.m. Smalls commandeered the 147-foot vessel from a dock fronting General Ripley’s home and office. Smalls and his crew sailed to a nearby dock, collected family members from another ship and headed toward sea..."



Dear friends,

There seems to be a tendency for people to ignore the heroism of individuals who represent a part of the struggle of African American people to resist oppression. The Civil Rights Movement was a brief period where accommodating, instead of resisting gained a lot of attention. However, the story on the link below defies that notion.

Moreover, one point to be remembered is: Our Black forebears, along with European American troops, fought for their freedom - with guns. No one "freed" them! In other words, they weren't just sitting around singing and waiting to be freed, as most school literature and the government- and corporate-controlled media outlets love to portray it.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.robertsmalls.org/
Read full post

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
Read full post

Red Tails - Is it about Black Consciousness or Black Apathy?

"...will we be as excited, if Obama has Black pilots bombing out our kin folks in Africa.."

Dear friends,

There seems to be a lot of frenzy about the newly-released Hollywood flick called Red Tails, particularly among many African Americans. The idea that courageous African American men fought valiantly against fascism during the Second World War is surely something of which to be proud, especially in a society that deliberately goes out of its way to ignore the relevance of the existence of African American people to either the past or present of this country.

However, aside from the fact that there are never either television shows or movies made that show Black Resistance, such as the many "slave" rebellions, or assaults against White Supremacy by Black warriors like Nat Turner or the men who burned down the house of Confederate leader Stonewall Jackson, much less our female freedom fighters like Ida B. Wells or Black Panther leader Elaine Brown who still fights for social justice to this very day, what should we really expect from Hollywood, regarding our story?

Moreover, is it not peculiar that: at a time when the US Military/Industrial Complex, supposedly lead by the so-called "Black" president, is under increasingly greater scrutiny than ever before, that a film about Black fighter pilots from the United States is being given so much honor and attention? If that's not the case, then why not show a movie about the War of Independence where Black soldiers fought overwhelmingly FOR the British against the new "Americans". In fact, most of our ancestors fought by a ratio of 4:1 in comparison to those Blacks who fought on George Washington's side, because Lord Dunmore had promised the former fighters freedom from slavery, if Britain won the war. Additionally, why not show that thousands upon thousands of Black Confederate soldiers fought against the Union during the Civil War (as opposed to those in the 54th Calvary that the movie "Glory" showed), because slavery was a class institution - NOT a "race" one. Please go to your local libraries or type "Black Slave masters" in your browsers!

Finally, will we be as excited, if Obama has Black pilots bombing out our kin folks in Africa, as he and his administration continue to set up shop in Africa through AFRICOM, as the United States sets up military bases throughout the Motherland? Let's keep all of this in perspective, please.

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Is Suicide neccesarily a "Bad Thing"?

"Of course, our government, which declares that it has sole authority over who lives or dies, including the individual citizen, conveniently makes committing suicide a crime, while the aforesaid government's execution of people is legal."






Dear friends,

At this particular time of the year, at least in this country, the holiday season brings a lot of feelings of celebration. However, there are many people who are reminded of loved ones who are no longer part of the living. No mood for celebrating.

Now, to be sure, human beings are the only creatures on this planet who are even aware of our existence. That's why the maintenance of cemeteries is strictly a human undertaking (pun intended. Other creatures have no need for them, since they have no idea that they even exist. That is, all of their actions are instinctual, even though some have the ability to reason and follow orders from humans. Additionally, this world, including people, exists whether any particular human being is alive or not. Ask any mortician.

Nonetheless, the desire to maintain one's status as a living being is reinforced by both mental and motor reflexes for self-preservation. So why do people sometimes consciously bypass the aforementioned mechanisms and take their own lives? Moreover, in a market-driven, possession-oriented society such as ours, where people alienate themselves from both themselves and the fruits of their labor, by surrendering such products or services just mentioned to an employer who will ultimately be the one making the profits from the hard work of the former, how do people persevere? This is especially disturbing, because people in our society are also alienated from each other. For instance, in the newer wealthy neighborhoods, they do not even bother to build sidewalks anymore. We need "community" in this country, more than ever.

To be sure, there is a generation raising children that is so steeped in this possession-oriented culture that ideas of community, and so forth, represent the folklore of generations past. Additionally, it is hard to steer the imagination towards humanity, community, and the common good in a society that holds individualism as paramount. Individualism has its place, but given too much emphasis, it can encourage greed, selfishness and petty materialism, creating serious identity problems along the way.

Therefore, and ultimately, if our youth are to be our future, then it will only happen if we as adults, particularly parents, take the reins of this present culture and provide our children with both an historical and social conscience, and set the example for them, by informing identity through recognition of the connection between generations and defining human life in a meaningful way (as opposed to basing who they are upon claims that cannot even be substantiated, regarding with whom they are having sex, or what "gang colors" they're wearing). That way, our society will benefit from the "leadership" of our youth. As well, the "market" will then be a function of the values of the society, and not vice versa.

Still, suicide is the word used to acknowledge self-murder. However, because we look at everything geometrically, that is, we give shape, form, and substance to phenomena, whether physically, intellectually, emotionally, or spiritually, then our understanding of all things is based upon "dialectical" vision or a "unity of opposites". That means that we cannot know what "hot" is, unless we know what "cold" is. We cannot know what "yes" is, unless we can relate to the concept of "no". Likewise, how can there be murder of others, without self-murder? And each time a person murders has s/he, at least partially, murdered her or his own humanity?

Moreover, is suicide necessarily a bad thing? For example, if an adult warrior, especially a male one, like a soldier or police officer, learns that he has a terminal illness and chooses not to be a burden to his loved ones or anyone else, is it wrong for him to end his life? After all. that it is an old tradition in all cultures and happens all of the time. Besides, that is a decision that has been made by a mature, responsible adult who. apparently, has a genuine "sense of self", and has made a final decision, of his own volition. Of course, our government, which declares that it has sole authority over who lives or dies, including the individual citizen, conveniently makes committing suicide a crime, while the aforesaid government's execution of people is legal. Huh?

At any rate, when children commit suicide other issues come into the dialogue. I mean, unlike the earlier-mentioned warriors, a child has not adequately developed a "sense of self" as an adult has to make that kind of decision about his or her life. That is, "sense of self" requires two criteria to be realized. The are: 1) The person knows what it is like to live alone on his or her own. and 2) The person knows what it is like to accomplish goals on his or her own.

Consequently, being under the care of an adult, a child who kills himself or herself brings great feelings of guilt to the caretaker(s). But is pointing fingers at the aforementioned caretaker(s) fair? For example, when I told her about writing this piece, one of my two daughters, Dr. Namandje N. Bumpus of Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, insisted that I should mention that Prozac, the popular anti-depressant drug, is directly responsible for many adolescent suicides these days. Also, she says that both freshmen and sophomore teens at schools like Cal Tech and MIT are still high on the list of teen suicides.

On the link below, renowned journalist Sandy Banks of the Los Angeles Times shares some ideas that are quite thought-provoking, regarding this subject. Cheers!

G. Djata Banks
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-1119-banks-20111119,0,3621640,full.column
Read full post

Dr. Chika Ezeanya exposes Obama administration's lack of Integrity

" 'So, shame on you, Barack Obama. It is time you ran a campaign consistent with your messages in public, that’s what I expect from you.' That was an unhappy Hilary Clinton..."







Dear friends,

As usual, one of Africa's premier journalists, Dr. Chika Ezeanya of Nigeria, provides us with a brilliant, "no-holds-barred" analysis of the enemies of Africa from both within and outside of our Mother continent that reminds me of the work of the late, great Dr. Walter Rodney. Enjoy!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://saharareporters.com/article/support-oil-subsidy-removal-shame-you-united-states
Read full post

School bullying in the headlines (originally posted 4/9/10)

“…we are all sickened by the notion of an “anti-bullying” law. Both the thought of it and any subsequent actions are useless! Let’s be serious. At what point is a person being bullied or vice versa – that is, at what point is a person bullying another?”

Dear friends,

The obituary reads, in part, “Phoebe leaves behind her mother Anne Obrien Prince, father Jeremy Prince, sisters Lauren, Tessa and Bridget and brother Simon.” Recent reports, regarding the unfortunate suicide of the former South Hadley, Mass. high school freshman Phoebe Prince seem, mostly, to be concentrating on alleged “bullies”, while disregarding the fact that Prince had an older sibling (a senior, at that) attending the exact the same school.

Apparently, Phoebe couldn’t appeal to this older sister for help. What was going on in the Prince household that such a lack of connection between siblings was happening, much less allowed? I mean, two siblings may have their differences; however, they will still defend each other against outsiders.

And what of the claim by an aunt from Northampton, Mass. that school administrators had been warned earlier in the school year of the now dead girl’s vulnerability to bullies? Does that aunt’s claim suggest that Phoebe Prince was some kind of “bully magnet”? If that is true, then it also means that she had learned to engage in masochistic behavior that would either draw bullies to her, or make people want to bully her. Duh. The question then would seem to be, “With what kind of people was she living?” As a matter of fact, was she being bullied at home by one or more of her four siblings too? It happens.

Additionally, not only to me, but to several other educators, as well, with whom I’ve connected about this whole mess, we are all sickened by the notion of an “anti-bullying” law. Both the thought of it and any subsequent actions are useless! Let’s be serious. At what point is a person being bullied or vice versa – that is, at what point is a person bullying another? Children can be cruel. Therefore, what law will stop that! Moreover, from where do kids learn to be cruel?

Finally, what’s all of the talk about a lawsuit? Who will pay? Our cash-strapped school system? It’s an easy payday for lawyers. Any trial will be a field day for even the most inept defense attorney. In any case, will any lawyer complain? After all, it’s the client’s money. Right?

On the link below is a piece that I sent back in 2009 to the Philadelphia Daily News about school violence. Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://articles.philly.com/2009-12-29/news/25270484_1_school-safety-safe-place-students
Read full post

Why doesn't the media show Elaine Brown?

 Dear Friends,

At this point of the "Occupy" Movement that has begun to spread across America, we are now seeing and hearing from some of the people who made names for themselves, years ago, not for actually doing real work, but, instead, for simply being a "celebrity" of the Movement. Now such folks are back in the spotlight. However, one person who the mainstream government- and corporate-controlled media has not been publicizing is Elaine Brown, my former Panther comrade.

Nevertheless, on the link below, is a seven minutes-long video that will introduce you to this longtime warrior.

All power to the people!

 G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roGNxckardg Read full post

More on Occupy Wall Street - what is hapening?

"what sympathy are the Occupy Wall Street folks going to get, if they start taking over buildings in order to provide shelter and work for themselves?"

Dear friends,

Recently, I questioned the effectiveness of the Occupy Wall Street Movement, in bringing change to our country.

Ultimately, in order for a group to sustain themselves, they have to acquire a means to produce their material means of survival. In other words, there's more to building community than people getting together and being nice to each other. Moreover, many of these people are basically destitute. Consequently, alien marauders can then move in and take advantage. That's what happened to African Americans after we fought with guns and freed ourselves during the North American Civil War or what's been called the First War of Black Liberation. (see Lloyd Hogan's Principles of Black Political Economy)

Instead of using such great energy to protest (and freeload), folks should combine to, for example, take over abandoned factory buildings (structures like that are abundant in this country), and organize both housing and business facilities. There are many carpenters, plumbers, and electricians who would surely help them. There may even be some artisans and others among them.

Please remember that the people themselves are the economy. That is, human beings both make and consume the products of their combined labor. It (the aforesaid economy) is not some mystical, anthropomorphic phenomenon that grows and recesses. That's a silly idea that is the kind of blather constantly spouted by North American so-called journalists and equally unprincipled college professors who defer any notion of integrity in their work, in order to keep their jobs.

So here another point is raised. That is, the type of "jobs", as it were, at which North Americans are most often employed, just as they are for the so-called journalists and professors just mentioned, are merely exercises in human acquiescence to superior authority. Worse yet, in order to endure the charade, folks alienate, not only themselves from their work, but themselves from themselves and their fellow workers. Ouch!

Additionally, it is here where the escape from all of the misery mentioned above, that is, drugs, sex, religion, you name it, take firm hold. People need to forget about themselves and life in general. This running from one's self is also essential, because being human is a very lonesome experience. After all, one can sleep beside another person for any number of years. Still, you are both lonely. After all, no one can eat for you or go to the bathroom for you. Of course, this escapism is very convenient and profitable for those who control the market that results from the products and services the aforementioned workers produce.

Hence, finding union with others is a way to alleviate some of the pain of lonesomeness. However, one has to be careful of the religious marauders. They prey on such folks. And so, the Occupy Wall Street Movement provides some positive union, but how long will it last, unless those folks establish plans for long term survival that doesn't require begging? And in an environment where poor people, like Tea Partyers, complain about the government wanting to tax the rich more, while, simultaneously, we see the US government, with its "Black" president, raiding Africa and the Middle East, claiming to be "liberators", what sympathy are the Occupy Wall Street folks going to get, if they start taking over buildings in order to provide shelter and work for themselves? That's what's been happening everywhere else. Will our government "help" Americans. as they did for the Egyptians and Libyans?

"Dare to struggle - dare to win" - Fredrick Douglass

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Is Quaddafy's Stand against White Supremacy and political Zionism his biggest offense? (originally posted 3/29/11)

“…should we not wonder who really wins with Quaddafy’s ouster?”

Dear friends,

While the African Holocaust, which is worldwide in its nature and scope, has been going on ever since Columbus’ first infamous voyage across the Ocean Sea, the cry for a United States of Africa is more necessary than ever.

Originally having been introduced by the great Marcus Garvey, then Drs. Kwame Nkrumah and W.E.B. DuBois, along with others, some 50-plus years ago, a concept that Quaddafy tried to re-introduce with the African Union two years ago (2009), Pan Africanism and its insistence upon a United States of Africa is the only valid philosophy for African peoples around the world.

After all, whether in New York City or Lagos, Nigeria, we will not be respected as a people until Africa is finally respected again, as it once was. Period! Moreover, now with so many African Americans drugging themselves with this “black president” nonsense, those who deny us our humanity everyday are wreaking havoc on the great continent.

Nevertheless, on the link below is an article by one Robert Downie, obviously, a C.I.A. – supported opinion maker, who tells of some of the generosity that Quaddafy has shown towards his African neighbors. The “analysis”, at least to me, leaves far too many questions. Therefore, it is extremely censored.

Still, in a time when the cowardly Obama snivels up to every right wing and political Zionist exploiter around, AFRICOM (the United States expansionist program that currently has the US military all over Africa), should we not wonder who really wins with Quaddafy’s ouster? After all, why does the US support Israel, a murderous enemy of humankind, as both of the aforementioned countries colluded with the former regime of apartheid South Africa, (now a neo-colony of European rulers and their offshoots in the Americas) with financial and technical resources?
G. Djata Bumpus
http://csis.org/blog/qaddafis-tangled-legacy-africa
Read full post

Why is Obama maintaining AFRICOM - and the war against Libya? (originally posted 8/3/11)

“He has an African name and purports to be African American. In other words, with such a ‘head of state’, I knew that that would be a strong basis for US multinational business to be able to open up markets in Africa.”

Dear friends,

Ever since he first started running for the presidential office, I have insisted that the only reason that Barack Obama was a good choice for the racist rulers of this country is: He has an African name and purports to be African American. In other words, with such a "head of state", I knew that that would be a strong basis for US multinational businesses to be able to open up markets in Africa.

After all, the days of European colonial rule are not that far in the past. Therefore, while China has opened up solid business relationships with a number of African countries, one can only imagine that some of the offshoots of the aforementioned European colonists, i.e., European American businesspeople, would find it difficult to meet welcoming arms there. I wonder why?

At any rate, after first using the flimsy excuse of fighting a “war on terror”, in early 2007, the person who was the president at the time, George W. Bush, instituted The United States Africa Command (USAFRICOM or AFRICOM).
However, Africans were not so lovey-dovey with the idea of having such a strong US military presence there. So, the headquarters of AFRICOM ended up being placed just outside of Stuttgart, Germany.

Nevertheless, AFRICOM has been involved in activities that make it apparent there is an ulterior motive for having military bases set up all over Africa’s 54 countries – oil.

Now, while some Black folks are concerned about the term “tar baby” being used in the same sentence as a reference to Barack Obama’s actions, at least to me, a much more important question is: Why is President Obama maintaining AFRICOM?

Additionally, why are Black journalists from around the country, who are meeting in Philadelphia beginning this week, wondering why, as a body, they are becoming more and more inconsequential, when African American people are not even informed about, for example, the actions of this president and inspired to demand meaningful representation from him?

Please check out the info on the link below. Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://peoplesworld.org/africom-and-the-libya-war/
Read full post

"Occupy Wall Street" makes NO sense

“…it is not the banks that are totally, or even mostly, at fault for their failures. Rather, it is our federal government that has continued to “bailout” a banking system that does not work well.”

Dear friends,

Lately, everyday, at least through the government- and corporate-controlled mainstream media, we have been both seeing and hearing about protesters occupying Wall Street, and now even their equally angry fellows have been appearing at banking and other establishments nationwide. However, it is not the banks that are totally, or even mostly, at fault for our current economic problems. Rather, it is, for example, our federal government that has continued to “bailout” a banking system that does not work well.

Moreover, how can citizens expect this government to faithfully behave in our interests, when its agents (in the form of politicians), from the White House to Capitol Hill, are so promiscuous with our trust, let alone our tax dollars, when conducting business affairs with corporations of all kinds? I mean, if one had such disrespect shown to him or her by a spouse, then divorce court would have already become a memory.

Consequently, the solution to the constant cycles of repression and depression in this political economy or process of social reproduction has to be found by all of us combining our inner and outer energies or powers in order to build genuine “communities”, where our banks are community-owned institutions that allow for the funding of businesses, home building, and even more importantly, provide the capital, as it were, for us to maintain value judgments that are based upon relationships that are independent yet cooperative, along with showing care and concern for our fellows, instead of power and, particularly, sexual greed, as all economic/social relations exist now, under the value judgments of a market-driven, possession-oriented society.

By the way, please note that when I say “sexual greed”, I am not simply referring to males who have more sexual interactions outside of their marriages than they do with their own wives, although that is not to be overlooked. Rather, I am talking about Male Supremacy, euphemistically called sexism, as females are expected to contribute vigorously to the proliferation of this or any other society, while they are not given the same access to, much less benefits of, the equality to become fully human, just for being of the “different“ sex. Meanwhile, males in all societies hog it all! In real communities, that would not be the case, and females would be raised to be as competent as males are, as opposed to trivializing their divine potentials so that they do not make males feel intimidated (thus, simultaneously, making males feel superior). Besides, from the cheating spouse to the BP oil spill, greed is always short-sighted.

Finally, the current spate of protests means nothing. It’s a waste of valuable energy. If anything, the “occupation” should be on the steps of White House and Capitol Hill, especially since it has been those federal politicians, ever since the end of the Civil War, who keep bailing out the failing banks and corporations.

Cheers!

G Djata Bumpus
Read full post

For Whom is Obama's Economic Plan? (originally posted Jan. 10, 2009)

"We know that 'Power corrupts.' Playing “sleight of hand” tricks and performing intellectual acrobatics, through tax cuts, with the “fruits” of citizens’ labor is simply more of the same..."

Dear friends,

Will President Obama's “make-work”/economic plan effort be much better than the ineffective welfare-to-work schemes that have popped up all over the country, during the past two decades? Why do we need a federal, centralized bureaucracy to manage our economic affairs anyway? And who is going to be building roads and bridges, Mr. Obama? That is hard and dangerous work. How will responsibilities be distributed? In securing work, what opportunities will African American males, much less other males who also look like you, as well as all female workers, have? Moreover, will not all of those laborers involved need to be fairly young?

In order to attract a large amount of young people, Mr. Obama will have to convince them that the work itself, not the paycheck, is the reward. Yet, in our possession-oriented, market-driven culture, most young people have no interest in doing hard labor. Besides, these days, the paycheck means more to them than having done the job well.

To be sure, the idea of appreciating our own ability to work has been one that has often escaped youth throughout human history. After all, it is hard as a young person to hear that the satisfaction of a job well done is its own reward, when s/he sees the inequities of the distribution of the harvesting of the "fruits" of labor all around us - from bankers to businesspeople to politicians and many others. “Work is the reward!” is one of those notions that would be fine if everyone believed it, but hard to swallow when you know others are getting away with doing so little. Hence, it is the unfairness that eats away at our resolve to do our best in society.

Still, President Obama must push forward in getting our youth to appreciate work. That will require leadership. Unfortunately, about this notion of work being the reward, as mentioned above, I have not heard one peep from the mouth of either our incoming president or the one going out, or the guy before that one. There is no leadership.

Rather, the only sense of urgency that President Obama seems to have is how quickly he can get some money into the hands of the big banks and companies. After all, who but big banks and companies will really be benefiting from this make-work venture that Mr. Obama is passing off as his "Economic Plan"? Heck, Halliburton will leave Iraq. Their contractors will make the money here, with less chance of losing their lives. Also, with Obama’s “make-work” enterprise, people will be able to buy DVDs and other electronic goods from the big national chain stores. They will be able to buy designer clothes from the national clothing chains, and so forth. The economy will be doing great! Right?

Thus far, we have only been considering blue collar workers. But what will become of the millions of laid-off office and white collar workers? How many will want to build bridges and roads? How many have the physical strength or emotional will to do so? How will a person who has been an account executive for the past fifteen years experience economic progress by doing “make-work” jobs to feed the family? Is that not a huge loss in his or her standard of living, by itself?

In another area of economic concern, instead of “Bail-outs” for incompetent executives and their gullible investors, how about the United Auto Workers themselves taking over the Big Three, in a similar context as the Avis workers did back in the 90s. To be sure, the former employees-now employers will not mind pay or other benefit cuts, because they will be developing an enterprise that belongs to them. As well, that particular union, UAW, with its, historically, suspect leadership, will, in effect, dissolve itself, since with the workers as the owners, they will not need anyone to represent them other than themselves. Currently, of course, like all workers, they need a union, because the employer and employees do not have the same interests. In other words, it is not in the interests of employers to represent the interests of the workers. If they did, then there would never be disputes or strikes, much less lay-offs and benefit cuts. Most importantly, if the workers take over the companies, it will be Americans making better cars for themselves/us and we will buy their products from them, because it will actually benefit all of us.

Ultimately, all capable people will have to discover the divine powers within themselves that will make them both creative and productive. As a matter of fact, at least to me, the best results of strong economic development are revealed by humans being able to spend their leisure time engaging in both personal and group interactions where one’s relatedness to himself or herself - and others – as opposed to the trinkets and baubles that one possesses – allows each citizen to cooperatively co-exist with his or her fellows in peace. It will require a leader who has wisdom, experience, and courage to guide the citizenry in that direction. Re-doing Bill Clinton’s administration will, predictably, "lead" us right back to where we are. Considering the make-up of Obama’s Cabinet as it now stands (of mostly Clinton people), and for all of the present hoopla about the “inauguration”, this is all sad – if not pathetic.

We know that “Power corrupts.” Playing “sleight of hand” tricks and performing intellectual acrobatics, through tax cuts, with the “fruits” of citizens’ labor is simply more of the same. Consequently, Americans need to scrap the kleptomaniacs who make up our federal government officials and Obama needs to “change” his current course, by becoming a leader who guides the American people in a way that helps us create our own industries, and build our own self-sufficient, loving, and, therefore, prosperous communities.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Bumpus interviews/discusses the present "mess" in Gaza - with a Jewish educator, activist, and scholar (originally posted 1/3/09)

I am coming to believe that there is a type of zero-sum game of discussion about Palestine and Israel that needs rethinking. Do you know what I mean by this? A half-century or more of Israelis bad/Palestinians good, or Arabs bad/Israelis good rhetoric leaves people nothing to do but react predictably to the latest crisis...


Dear friends,

The current blood-letting that is going on in the Gaza Strip, particularly, should, at least to me, raise questions in all of us, regarding our genuine belief in human freedom, dignity, and justice.

I am honored to begin a series of discussions about the constant mess that represents the life experiences of our brothers and sisters, of all groups, in the Middle East. Neil Zagorin, a brilliant thinker, who has appeared on this blog in the past, brings a wealth of scholarship and goodwill to the dialogue that appears below.

One Love, One Heart, One Spirit!
G. Djata Bumpus
*******************************************
Djata: Neil, in our attempt to bring more clarity to the current view of what is going on in the Middle East generally, how do you think we should approach it? In other words, is it the “terms” of the discussion or the “facts” of same that we need to consider?

Neil: I want to put it out there that our written exchange stems from a meal we shared recently, when there happened to be disturbing news about Israel’s military operation in Gaza. We’re both citizens of the U.S. You’re an African American with family roots in Barbados. I’m an Ashkenazic Jew with family roots in the Czarist Empire. It was the kind of situation in which probing discussion of the Palestinian-Israeli impasse often goes nowhere, yet we shared outrage, dismay, and sadness in many of the same ways. More importantly, we explored areas where we might differ without personal venom, and most importantly, did so while resisting the temptation to resort to dehumanizing narratives about either side, Palestinian or Israeli. I think this is too rare: do you agree?

So, I am coming to believe that there is a type of zero-sum game of discussion about Palestine and Israel that needs rethinking. Do you know what I mean by this? A half-century or more of Israelis bad/Palestinians good, or Arabs bad/Israelis good rhetoric leaves people nothing to do but react predictably to the latest crisis: anti-Israel as usual, anti-Arab/Palestinian as usual, or anti-both as usual. It’s a horrendously complicated situation. Israel is much stronger than the Palestinians, but they’re both small and diverse groups of angry, scared, confused people in a world where small nations – and they’re both small nations – can sway in the wind created by bigger powers.

Djata: Okay. But is calling Israel a small nation in the same context as one does Palestine a false abstraction? Israel does have nuclear weapons, after all. More significantly I must ask, at what point does the government of Israel pull a Nagasaki and Hiroshima, as the US did in becoming a world power?

Neil: Israel is a military giant compared to Palestine, but not compared to the entire Arab world. Don’t forget that Israel has also relied heavily on U.S. support for decades to maintain its tenuous position in the world. So I’ll maintain that Israel is a small country.

I observe that it’s common for critics of Israel to view Israel as some huge monolith that always sets the agenda. For all of Israel’s resolution in pursuing its aims, I challenge you to acknowledge the many ways that efforts by Jews to build a Jewish state have been influenced and conditioned heavily by outside factors. That is,the Ottoman Empireʼs colonial policy allowed Palestinian land to be legally acquired for Jewish settlement in the late nineteenth, early twentieth centuries.

The British and French Empires controlled the Middle East after World War 1, and redrew the map, physically and politically, in ways that endure today. The British Empire made differing promises about Palestine to Jews and Arabs, and, in dissolution after World War 2, dropped the conflict into the lap of the fledgling United Nations. The Nazi campaign to kill Jews, and the world’s reaction to it, had a huge impact on the movement to create a Jewish state. The West and Soviet Bloc both conducted Cold War conflict by proxy in the Middle East.

It’s still an area in which governments and non-governmental actors from abroad support one side or another for financial or political gain. There are governments or movements that support one side or another as minor players in some larger conflict. There are governmental and non-governmental organizations in other places that profit from munitions expended in Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I’m willing to bet that there are smaller and larger military organizations in many places that have some involvement in what’s going on in Gaza to draw lessons for their own use about waging asymmetric warfare. There are governments or movements beside Hamas that anticipate political gain if Hamas continues to lob rockets randomly at Israel to precipitate continued military conflict in which Gazans will suffer the most. Do you think I’m badly wrong in these observations?

As for nukes, they say that Israel has them. If so, I pray they never use them, but I’m a lot more worried about the possibility of nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India.

Djata: I think that what you’re doing here is keeping with the facts, but not with the terms. And that’s fine. Yet, based upon our initial premise, how do we keep the dialogue in "terms" as opposed to "facts", in light of the obvious domination by the Israelis over Palestinians? Additionally, since the violence (rocket launches) of Hamas is mostly symbolic, as are the rocks thrown at both real and imagined planes in the sky, by small Palestinian boys, when does the reality of "moral superiority" defeat the Israelis, regardless of the benefits of this conflict to bigger powers?

Neil: Djata, when thinking of the difference between “terms” and “facts,” I’m thinking of the zero-sum game of judgment that we’re seeing even now. There’s a nightmare occurring in Gaza. Lots of people are quick to point to one side or the other as the villain, forgoing a deeper discussion that this tangled tragedy deserves. By contrast, I think thereʼs responsibility in many places, both in Israel/Palestine and outside. .

In physical confrontation between Palestinians and Israelis, hatred and murderous intent exist on both sides, though I have to reject the stereotyping of either group. In my understanding, Israelis have shed much more Palestinian blood than Palestinians have shed Israeli blood. Am I wrong in thinking this? In trying to find a way forward, this will make reconciliation, if this will ever happen, a complicated as well as painful process. Somewhere along the way, Israel should expect to be judged for the number of casualties it has caused.

I do not agree that Hamas' targeting of Israeli civilians can be entirely categorized as "symbolic". Why launch rockets at Ashkelon when the thousands of Israeli soldiers massed at the borders of Gaza are available as a foe against whom one can symbolically resist with dignity and honor? Yes, part of what's going on is an oppressed people demonstrating its uncompromising resistance to subjugation in the modest ways possible to it. Another part of it is that the spilling of Jewish (not just Israeli) blood as an end in itself beyond national self-determination is one of the goals for many of the militants in Hamas, and analagous groups. Some of these people are real religious zealots, and do not operate within the moral or political framework of the national liberation movements that struggled in many parts of the world for justice and liberation when we were younger.

Justice needs to be achieved in the Middle East. I ain't King Solomon, and I don't know to achieve it, though the two-state solution, with the world insisting, watching, and supporting so that it works in some real way, seems like the way to go. More funerals of Palestinian children will not bring justice. I do not want to believe that most Palestinians, and Arabs and Muslims in a wider sense, as angry as they might be with Israel, would really view more funerals of Jewish children as a triumph. Some of the militants who launch rockets at Israeli cities, when they already have the world's full attention, would. They should be judged accordingly.
None of this is to claim that there is equivalence between the suffering of Gazans and whatever atmosphere of fear Hamas is able to achieve in Israel. I don't think that Israel is morally superior; many of its views, goals, and methods are morally troubling, in my opinion.

Do you think that all of Hamas' views, goals, and methods are really morally superior to those of Israel? Something I'd like us to look at together over the coming months is how Palestinians look at Hamas; I'm getting the sense that it's increasingly not with tremendous pride and pleasure.

Djata: I think that we can discuss solutions in a future discourse. Your points are certainly well-taken. To be sure, we hear a lot about the involvement of the United States with Israel. Some have even called Israel our 51st state. Yet, are there any other countries or bodies who share culpability in the mess that has been proliferating for much of the 20th Century -and beyond, in Palestine/Israel?

Neil: You’re right, we hear a lot about the involvement of the U.S. with Israel, here in the U.S. It follows predictable patterns: either you hear about an admirable bond of solidarity between two good nations, or you hear about a partnership in which the U.S. supports, or is manipulated to support, Israel’s unjust domination of Palestinians.

For our purposes, I’d like to respond to the latter view. In my opinion, Israel should be held accountable for its actions, and this includes an accounting for the current nightmare in Gaza. With that said, I am hesitant to assume that Israel has been and continues to be in confident control of its own destiny.

To those who feel that Israel should bear responsibility for what’s happening in Gaza, I say “you’re right.” I’d say the same thing to those who feel that Hamas should bear responsibility. I want to add to this that responsibility should be borne by those, neither Israeli nor Palestinian, who pursue their own interests in the Middle East without regard to the interests of millions of frightened, despairing people who live between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River.

Djata: Yes, but let us not forget that during the apartheid era in South Africa, the US circumvented restrictions imposed by the UN embargo against South Africa, by funneling both financial and technical assets to apartheid South Africa through Israel – a country that ignored the aforementioned UN sanctions. At any rate, in speaking out for justice for Palestinians, when is it right to acknowledge the failures of their leaders? Likewise, in acknowledging Israel's vulnerabilities, as Western media outlets so commonly do, at some point, is it either proper or improper to recognize Israel’s use of military and political force, as well, such as bombing the homes of Hamas leaders? Israeli leaders are never targeted it seems, after all.

Neil: Defenders of Palestine or Israel acknowledge the moral and political failings of the side they support incidentally, if at all. That’s my observation. More honesty is necessary to bring greater understanding and less dehumanization of both Israelis and Palestinians. That’s my conclusion.

Concerning South Africa and Palestine, Nelson Mandela has made the point of acknowledging the steadfast support of Palestinians during the anti-apartheid struggle. I admire and honor Palestinians for this.

Concerning South Africa and Israel, it’s an anti-Israel orthodoxy to underscore Israel’s role in working with the apartheid regime. Yes, Israel did this, and should answer for it, but we both know that there were many governments world-wide during the apartheid years that paid lip-service to justice while quietly doing business with Pretoria. The Israel-South Africa connection has been of undoubted value to those seeking to present the Palestinian cause to the world, but does continuing to stress it as has been commonly done come into conflict with the spirit of South Africa’s truth and reconciliation process, which seeks honesty and openness about what actually transpired during the apartheid era?

Djata: While apartheid is gone in “code”, unfortunately, a new social uprising has begun there against injustice and impropriety. Nevertheless, it has been a pleasure Neil, as always. Until next time, my final thought is: Militarily-speaking, why do you think that the Bush administration finds it reasonable for the Israeli government to attack the Palestinians in Gaza, when our own government sought no such reprisal, of any kind, against Saudi Arabia, when 19 of their citizens killed thousands of Americans in one day - on 9/11?

Neil: Oil is precious and blood is cheap. I think it’s the responsibility of citizens here in the U.S. to prevent our government from acting as if this is true.

Look, man, this has been great. We’ve been wrangling with some thorny, complicated issues, trying to be moral in our judgments and analysis, without oversimplifying, and without resorting to any of the racist discourses about Arabs and Jews that often poison discussions about the Middle East. To me, that’s heartening.

Djata: Cool, Bro’. Peace.

Read full post

Another brief interview/discussion with Neil Zagorin about recent developments in Palestine/Israel

"Neil: The Israeli body politic is complicated. Leaving aside what the approximately 25% of Israeli citizens who aren’t Jewish think about Palestinian independence, there is a spread of opinion among Israeli Jews about Palestinian independence."

Djata: Neil, recently, I saw a news clip that featured the mayor of Hebron boasting about how he and his constituents are looking forward to expanding Jewish settlements, especially due to the return of Benjamin Netanyahu as the Prime Minister of Israel. Is this an anti-peace position that that mayor is taking?

Neil: A two-state solution in which Palestine becomes independent in the West Bank and Gaza, and Israel withdraws to its 1949-1967 borders has been discussed and negotiated for the past 15 years or so. It’s not the same thing as peace, but it’s a political resolution that might make peace possible someday – or that’s the hope. The two-state solution assumes that Jewish communities built in the West Bank since the Six-Day War of 1967 will be dismantled to make an independent Palestine possible. Expanding Jewish settlement in the West Bank complicates the process of removing Jewish communities from the West Bank. This in turn complicates the prospect of some type of two-state solution.

Djata: Does it seem that, at least, some political Zionists do not recognize the right of Palestinians to exist as a free and autonomous people within the present geographical domain of Palestine/Israel?

Neil: The Israeli body politic is complicated. Leaving aside what the approximately 25% of Israeli citizens who aren’t Jewish think about Palestinian independence, there is a spread of opinion among Israeli Jews about Palestinian independence. There’s a small group of Israeli Jews who believe that Palestinian independence is the right thing to support no matter the risks involved. There’s a much larger group, possibly a majority, who would support Palestinian independence if they felt it brought them security and peace. At this point many of these Israeli Jews are despairing that Palestinian independence would bring Israel security and peace. There are some other Israeli Jews who favor or would support Palestinian independence, but view this as a settlement to be unilaterally imposed by Israel. Avigdor Lieberman, the new Foreign Minister, exemplifies this. His platform calls for Israel to annex the large Jewish settlement blocs in the West Bank, while insisting that a number of Arab-majority areas of Israel adjacent to the West Bank leave Israel to become part of some type of Palestinian state.

Then there are groups of Israeli Jews who have a vision of Israel as a Jewish nation-state stretching from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River. Such visions may be based on political nationalism (many early Zionists held this view,) a fundamentalist reading of the bible (God gave all the Land of Israel to the Jews,) or some combination of the two. So, yes, there are Israeli Jews who oppose any kind of Palestinian political independence between the Mediterranean and the Jordan. Political parties informed by these beliefs predominate in the new Israeli government. Their current electoral strength stems partly from the fact that many Israeli Jews who formerly were willing to negotiate for Palestinians independence and Israeli security now despair of that option, and support political parties that take a hard-line stance on maintaining Israeli control of the West Bank.
Read full post

Funeral Services for George Benton on Monday, September 26, 2011

Funeral arrangements have been made for the late George Benton, the noted Philadelphia middleweight contender and Hall of Fame boxing trainer, who was 78 when he died early Monday morning.

There will be a viewing from 9 to 10 a.m. next Monday, Sept. 26, at Christlike PG Faith Baptist Church, 2901 North 25th Street, in North Philly. A memorial service will follow from 11 a.m. to noon.

There is a strict "no pants" policy for women. All women must wear a dress or skirt to be admitted.
Read full post

George Benton, a true giant (May 15, 1933 - Sept. 19, 2011)

"The range of a student's ability is seldom as wide as the range of encouragement that s/he receives" - Eshu Bumpus


Dear Friends,

Kahlil Gibran wrote, "Your pain is the breaking of the shell that encloses your understanding."

While watching Monday Night Football at a sports bar, earlier this week, I received a voice mail message on my cell phone, from a dear friend, who told me that George Benton had passed earlier that day. While I could see it happening over the past few years, the moment that I knew would happen wasn't any less shocking for me.

I left the place right away and went home. After making a couple of phone calls, I posted a small comment on Facebook. Then I emailed another old and dear friend, Elmer Smith (who, btw, will be retiring from the Philadelphia Daily News after 39 yeas, on Friday.)

The next morning, Elm responded, in part: "This is tragic, Bump. I spoke of him this week with my editor. I’ve told him this is not a fight town it’s a fighters town, a place where a kid can learn to fight from a seasoned pro in a gym where he can test his skills with other well-trained Young prospects...

To be sure, Georgie Benton wasn't the only one to fit that bill. I mean, back in the Seventies and before, cats like Joe Frazier, Toothpick Brown, Al Massey, Gypsy Joe Harris, Jimmy Witherspoon, Slim Jim Robinson, Brother Wesley, and Papa Stoppa, up to the Nineties and to this very day with other Philly prizefighters like the now late Artie "Moose" McCloud and Eugene "Cyclone" Hart, to name a couple, have shared their talents with youngsters around town. All of the aforementioned were giants, and some had trained world champions.

But Georgie Benton was the "Giant among giants". That's why, when I, a top amateur boxer in New England at the time, was introduced to Joe Frazier, back in 1978, and he offered me to come down and have George Benton look at me, I was honored to think that I would be training with the person who was already considered the best in the business (as George's picture that particular month graced the cover of Ring Magazine after guiding Leon Spinks to victory over Muhammad Ali). Nevertheless, as soon as I got off of the Amtrak train and crossed the street to Joe Frazier's famed gym on Broad Street, George greeted me, told me that he had been expecting me, and then threw me right in the boxing ring to spar. I did well.

George was really excited, and so was I. Joe Frazier's assistant, the now late Lee Grant, then drove me to a fabulous apartment in the Far Northeast of Philadelphia and told me that that was my new home. A few days later, I was taken to lunch and chauffeured to Joe's lawyer's office where I signed a contract. Before long, I found myself in a whole new league, sparring with pro contenders like Jimmy Young, Tex Cobb, Marvin Stinson, Jerry "The Bull" Martin, Willie "The Worm" Monroe, and many others, the whole time under the tutelage of George Benton.

I was being carefully nurtured. Years later, that would serve well for me, as it allowed me to do the same thing for ordinary people, mostly whose interests were not to become professional boxers, but to learn how to gain the confidence to address the many confrontations, whether personal or social, that we must all encounter in this very lonesome experience called human life. George Benton taught me that with patience, imagination, and creativity, I could do just that. And those sentiments have provided me with a livelihood for the past 23 years, and going. And I owe a great deal of it to George.

My personal pro boxing career was cut short, because I was a single parent (for a young man, Black or otherwise, unheard of - in those days). Therefore, unable to train properly (time-wise), much less get fights consistently, my priorities for raising my toddler son outweighed my desire for fortune and fame as many of my close gym buddies like Mike Spinks, Dwight Braxton/Qawi, and Marvis Frazier acquired only a few years later.

Still, George and I remained in contact, periodically, long after my career had ended. Unfortunately, in the early 2000s, his 22 years of prizefighting that happened prior to his long career as a trainer, caught up with him, and he began to develop Alzheimer's disease.



During the last five years of his life, I began deliberately making visits to him as part of my schedule whenever I was in Philly. He was surrounded by his loving family. The top floor of the townhouse in North Philly where he lived (and owned) was all his. He mostly laid in his canopied bed all day, watching, on his huge television (48" screen?), Cowboy movies, his favorite genre of films. He was on meds, but was aware somewhat of his surroundings. Sometimes he spoke. Often he did more listening. His son, Andre, and his wife, Mildred, took care of his affairs completely. Moreover, unlike most prizefighters and professional athletes in general, he hardly died destitute. He was well off, because the gobs of money that he made training world class fighters had afforded him the ability to own several rental properties and have a good bank account. He lived for 78 years, did a lot, and went a lot of places. And so, through my sadness, I can confidently say to all of us who are still here, in the words of all boxing coaches, "Keep punchin'!".

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Is Israel a "Democracy"? (originally posted 8/19/11)

"...democracy only has any integrity, much less validity, if we view the term democracy in relation to the characteristics of any specific institution."

Dear friends,

The notion that the right to vote is "democracy" is foolish, if not deceitful. After all, there are many dictatorships around the world today, and have been in the past, where citizens of a particular regime have the right to vote. As well, especially on the federal level, even in this country, we have seen how vote counts can be manipulated. As a matter of fact, the whole notion of the term "democracy" being an institution, as is the case for, say, capitalism or the Super Bowl, is false.

After all, an institution represents certain activities that are governed by special rules. Moreover,, some institutions require a building - like banks or museums, while others don't. I mean, how many times have you heard a Black preacher say, "This building is not the church." In fact, the Black church started on enslavers' ship and later in cotton and tobacco fields, not when Richard Allen of Philadelphia and some other great men and women started the Free African Society in Philly back in the last quarter of the 18th Century.

Moreover, democracy only has any integrity, much less validity, if we view the term democracy in relation to the characteristics of any specific institution. So, an institution can have either democratic or non-democratic characteristics.

Nevertheless, the hilarious claim of Israel being a democracy is outrageous. The constant murder and bullying by this regime, along with their total disregard for humanity, especially as it relates to not only Palestinians, but anyone who questions their horrific actions, includes attacking anyone who questions Israeli actions with the moral terrorism of being "anti-Semitic". And there are even people out here stupid enough to suggest that there are two sides to this story. That's like saying that there were two sides to the story, when Black captive workers, so-called slaves, like Nat Turner, Harriet Tubman, and so many others revolted.

On the link below is a 12 minutes-long video by an exceptional journalist, Jonathan Cook, who has done quite a bit of investigating into the whole enterprise that is euphemistically called Israel. Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiKX-CGpDos Read full post

NYC's 42nd Annual African American Day Parade

the 42nd Annual
African American Day Parade
Sunday September 18th, 1:00 PM
111th Street & Adam Clayton Powell Blvd. To 136th Street
Read full post

Obama's economic plan has nothing to do with ordinary people

“Mr. Obama’s insistence upon making businesses wealthier by further cutting taxes makes no sense, especially since the outrageous “Federal Bailout” has already proven that approach to be completely dubious, if not criminal.”

Dear friends,

Last night’s presentation by Barack Obama was the same run-of-the-mill blather that we’ve been hearing from him for several years now. The crucial point that both he and his predecessors, along with Congress, have refused to appreciate is the fact that the real product of economic development is human, not fiscal. Therefore, Mr. Obama’s insistence upon making businesses wealthier by further cutting taxes makes no sense, especially since the outrageous “Federal Bailout” has already proven that approach to be completely dubious, if not criminal.

Still, even worse, during his speech, he even stooped to becoming a doo-rag preacher, replete with quoting from the Bible, as he shamelessly used religion and a little girl’s unfortunate murder to stir up listeners. I found this to be exceptionally dishonest and cowardly of him, because, under his command, US drone rockets kill little girls in Pakistan almost everyday, under the guise of a “War on Terror”, as the US satellite state that is, euphemistically, called Israel murders Palestinian children equally as frequent.

And, worst of all, having two daughters, the emphasis that his administration puts on childhood obesity, as opposed to violence against females - the world’s worst problem, more so than even nuclear proliferation, much less worldwide hunger and disease, when literally every second of every minute, of every day, a female is being physically assaulted somewhere in the world is unconscionable! Moreover, what a loving father this guy is.

But getting back to the “economy”, how will the people of this nation socially reproduce themselves as a distinct population, when there is no specific plan, much less intent, to include our youth in the process? After all, if they are our future, then it seems, at least to me, that we should prepare them to replace us. But how can that happen if, for example, the mainstream media, that is-the chief opinion-makers, are more concerned with selling advertisements than informing the citizenry to inspire us to do what we can to embrace each other in a peaceful and cooperative effort to co-exist? (By the way, please don’t forget that some types of advertisements and commercials that are shown in the US are actually illegal in other advanced countries, due to their psychologically-manipulative nature.)

And please don’t bring the lie about people determining what the market has to offer, based upon what they want to buy. People buy what’s put in front of them. For instance, if you want something to eat, do you go hungry until you find the product that suits your preference, or do you simply buy what’s available? Only a complete moron would do the former.

And how much of what we buy, much less desire, is simply related to the ideas and opinions that have been imposed upon our minds through cultural institutions like the media, schools, and churches? As well, in deference to the threat capacity (police and military) of the government, how much of people’s thinking and behavior are controlled and directed as such, by people having already internalized the aforementioned deference beforehand?

No. Obama hasn’t a clue, nor do his opponents. It’s all about power and greed! It has nothing to do with economic development. Still, Black folks support him unconditionally. As the African proverb goes: Before the fool has learned the game, the players have dispersed.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
Read full post

Animal cruelty - creating dialogue about ourselves? (originally posted 8/10/08)

"To be sure, both the care and lack of it that is being directed towards non-human animals is interesting. It raises a lot of questions about how we look at ourselves, much less the aforementioned critters."

Dear friends,

To be sure, both the care and lack of it that is being directed towards non-human animals is interesting. It raises a lot of questions about how we look at ourselves, much less the aforementioned critters. Of course, that means a lot of things. I hope to raise some dialogue about this issue. After all, especially religious institutions have made most people see humans as being apart from nature, when, actually, just like birds and fishes, we are a part OF it (i.e., nature). Consequently, it seems, at least to me, that issues about the abuse of domesticated pets, for example, are very much connected to the same problems that humans experience as a result of our violent sentiments and actions, including personal conflicts as well as international wars....

In recent times, a professional football player, Michael Vick, and his brother were convicted of perpetrating very sick and cruel acts upon some dogs they "owned". Yet, the abuse of dogs like greyhounds, as well as horses, for example, is quite legal and, in fact, proliferates on race tracks, almost everyday, in our country. What distinguishes the cruelty that was delivered by the Vicks from their counterparts at the race tracks just mentioned?

Nevertheless, the author of the article on the link below, Dana DiFilippo of the Philadelphia Daily News, is someone with whom I have connected every now and then, over the past several years. He writes about a variety of topics. However, I had to touch bases with him on this one, not just because it is quite informative, but, as well, it made me reflect upon issues of both violence and the lack of civility that is ingrained in so many citizens in our society. Worse yet, the improprieties are not just directed towards dogs and such, for it seems to spread across the Ocean Sea, as it were, denying other nations their rights to territorial integrity. "What's that all about?", as the jargon goes.

G. Djata Bumpus
Animals 'jailed' for owners' legal woes Philadelphia Daily News 07/31/2008*
Read full post

Complete Media Blackout of August 13th protest against US involvement in Libya (originally posted 8/16/11)

"...where's our "Black" president?...And where is a single one of the "Black" journalists of NABJ (National Association of Black Journalists) who held a Love Party and golf tournament in Philly last weekend?"

Dear friends,

According to personal reports that I received, this past Saturday (8/13/11), some 100, 000 people rallied in Harlem for a protest against the US War in Libya. Yet, conveniently, we haven't heard a peep about it through either the print or electronic media in the US.

Meanwhile, where's our "Black" president? And where is a single one of the "Black" journalists of NABJ (National Association of Black Journalists) who held a Love Party and golf tournament in Philly last weekend? And where's loudmouth Al Sharpton?

At any rate, on the link below is a little bit of info and a 10 minutes-long video in reference to what the Libyan situation is. This coming Saturday (8/21/11), a similar huge protest is planned in Boston.

"Dare to struggle - dare to win!" - Frederick Douglas

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/videos/article_8038.shtml
Read full post