Muslim Bushido

The Sojourner's Passport Site Has Launched!

2010-01-27T16:56:00.007-06:00

I'm delighted to announce that The Sojourner's Passport site has launched! You can visit it at http://www.sojournerspassport.com/.

Everyone, I can't thank you enough for your ongoing encouragement and support; I truly appreciate it. Your support is what made this possible. And here's a special shout-out to my web designers at Educo Web Design. They're nice people to deal with, and they do outstanding work!

Peace and blessings,
Khadija Nassif

Watch the Book Trailer, Buy the Book!

2010-01-25T07:44:00.012-06:00

I'm delighted to announce that the book and its book trailer are finally out! You can watch the book trailer here and buy the book here

Everyone, I can't thank you enough for your ongoing encouragement and support; I truly appreciate it. Your support is what made this possible. And here's a special shout-out to my web designers at Educo Web Design. They're nice people to deal with, and they do outstanding work!

Once the new blog site is up and running (which will be soon, hopefully), it will have a special, downloadable excerpt from my next book exclusively for readers who have bought The Sojourner's Passport. I can't wait!

A View From Across The Ocean: A Reader's Money Quote From JaliliMaster

2010-01-22T17:57:00.026-06:00

The Reader's Money Quote is a statement that is of such insight and importance that it merits frequent and loud repetition. These Reader's Money Quotes are from an astute UK-based African reader named JaliliMaster (actually, I think of her as one of the international "news correspondents" that this blog has been blessed to have). She said the following in response to the From the "I Told You So" Department-Pres. Obama Watch Division post (my responses are in bold italics):

I agree re: the extended readers money quote regarding dominance. Other ethnicities are doing it and excluding blacks. This is not unique to America, so folks should not think that if they go to another country, they won't face this same type of discrimination. This is the same attitude that allowed these other 'ethnics' to trick AA's in the first place. They thought that other people of colour would have solidarity with them when it came to whites. Turns out, they will stand with you as far as you are needed then you get dropped. [Khadija: This phrase, "they will stand with you as far as you are needed then you get dropped," should be painted on most African-Americans' foreheads. Starting with our gullible, idiotic (mis)leaders.]

In the UK, a Tamil man was taken to court for racially-motivated firing of black employees. Now if anyone knows about the Tamils, they are Sri-Lankan minorities who have been at war for years and are at the bottom of the country socially, economically etc. Yet, he got to britain and used all his money to buy a petrol station service shop. The first thing he did was to fire the employees one-by-one, who were all black Africans, then he hired new supervisors, all Tamil. [Khadija: It's normal human nature to take care of folks in this order: self, family, clan, ethnic group. With many people in many countries, "nation" isn't even on that list. With most people across the board, outsiders are almost NEVER on the "take care of them" list. People who are in touch with reality understand this; and are therefore not depending on others to so-called "do right by them" by taking care of them.]

This man was then taken to court by the employees. He was ordered by the judge to re-employ them or face fines. He chose to pay compensation to these employees than have them working for him. [Khadija: Right, that's to be expected. It's very difficult to bumrush your way onto somebody else's "take care of them" list.]

He was asked how he could be so okay with his racism, he felt there was nothing wrong with it as it was his business. [Khadija: To even ask that question is show how naive one is. {shaking my head}] The man who was interviewing him is some black actor(or other personality) who was doing a documentary. He was the kumbaya type of negro, questioning why people of colour cannot just 'work together'. [Khadija: Oh, puh-leeze.]

I remember he went into Asian communities(Pakistani, Indian etc), and exposed the entrenched racism towards blacks. [Khadija: Then I'm sure this foolish Negro got an earful from those South Asians. From what I've observed of them in the US, they discriminate among themselves based on color. The (arranged) marriage ads that Indians and Pakistanis put in "Muslim" publications openly state that the parent placing the ad is looking to marry their child to persons with "fair complexions." They're certainly not interested in cuddling up with folks who are of African descent and therefore "officially" Black.]

This silly negro started pontificating on camera, even as one Indian man boasted and even mocked that if blacks are so good, how come all the businesses in black communities are owned by Asians?! This negro started wailing that the Asians should be 'fair' and hire blacks. [Khadija: {chuckling}] It never occured to him to question why blacks: (1)Refuse to open their businesses AND manage it properly, and (2) why negroes would rather patronise any other business than a black-owned one!

On a final note, the whole kool-aid(I hate using that term) drunk by black folks in relation to Obama is symptomatic of how blacks, and in particular AA's, refuse to properly vet those that claim to represent them. I've seen many AA's talk about thier 'African Brothers' and 'hang' with them in solidarity, but never make any effort to engage in economic and other financial projects that could be to their benefit. They'd stand by as these African negroes do business with whites, and the whites exclude them(AA's) from being able to partake, in many cases, with the Africans knowledge. No offense, but AA's need to stop being fools. Alot of you seem to have this view that these African 'leaders/reps' would always have your backs, when they don't even have the backs of their fellow country men. [Khadija: JaliliMaster, THANK YOU for the courtesy of telling THE TRUTH. And doing so in the spirit of seeing African-Americans wake up and do better. You already know this, but let me point this out to my fellow African-Americans: We have the deadly mental habit of assuming that other people view the world the same way we do, and that they think the same way we do. They DON'T.

For one of many examples, most African-Americans have the "take care of them" list backwards compared to every other group of people. We put outsiders first and put ourselves last. African-American women put themselves DEAD LAST on the "must be taken care of" list. Nobody else thinks like this.]

The same thing is done with AA leaders, where having the black skin is enough. I've noticed the British governments habits (and the American too), of sending black faces to represent them in African countries when it comes to political issues (say negotiations in Zimbabwe, Sudan etc), because they think they would be better able to trick them with a black face, but then send white faces when it comes to financial issues, because they don't want black folks to be the link to their source of income. Folks need to understand that money is always going to be made, it's all about who makes it. With the recession, it is the smartest that will come out ontop, get with it!

Okay, I tried posting my comments, but it was too long so I'll break them down:

Obama is weak. That is the plain truth. In the case of Bush, only a select few were allowed to speak. With Obama, he allows many to air their views, but only takes the views of a select few into account. What he doesn't realise is that that is no different from Bush. I'm surprised that many could not see Obamas weakness till now. [Khadija: From what I observe, most African-Americans still can't see Obama's weakness. As a friend mentioned to me earlier this morning, most African-Americans will hypnotically cling to (and fall with) Obama to the bitter end. Even after it's all over, they still won't understand what happened, or why.]

Ignoring the fact that alot of the criticism from the right is racially motivated, there are some instances where he should listen. Him bowing to foreign leaders is one of them. Obama seems pretty convinced that he is this all-knowing, world-travelled man, because he lived in God knows where when he was a child. He thinks that he knows more than anybody else about other cultures. That is why he insists on doing nonsense like bowing to other heads of state. In these countries, bowing (or kneeling/bending the knee etc) is used as a sign of respect. But thats where Obamas knowledge stops. It is used as a sign of respect to those who one considers to be above them. [In Obama's case, since he's not actually African-American--he's half continental African and half-White---this is a case of him succumbing to the general (ignorant) American assumption that other people think the way Americans do. In this case, believing that other people subscribe to the "people are people, and people are the same all over, and everybody is as informal as Americans" nonsense. Umm . . . NO.

People are NOT just people in other places. Many other cultures have much more rigidly observed hierarchies. This is reflected in many languages even by "little" things, such as using much more formal forms of address when speaking to people who are in any way "above" you (more educated, older, wealthier, etc.). In many other cultures, everybody has a commonly understood and accepted "place."]

It is the reason the when Laura Bush met the Queen of England, rather than curtsying, she only gave a very slight tip of the head. Why? Her husband was the head of state. She assumes his same level. Therefore, all heads of state are of the same level. The Queen is the head of state, and secondly, Laura is not a British subject, and therefore doesn't bow. [Khadija: That's right.]

I don't know whether or not Michelle had the common sense to do the same thing, although reports said that when they first met, away from cameras, she gave a little curtsey. Try paying attention to foreign media for once, one would see a difference between that and what passes for 'news' in this part of the world. I remember when he went to Saudi Arabia, the moment he bowed, the entire Saudi media went ecstatic, because they felt he was 'submitting'. [Khadija: That's right. Obama was silly enough to think that he was ingratiating himself with these people by doing that. Instead, he was inviting them to hold him in contempt.] That had NEVER been done by any American president before. Now, wherever he goes, this president, supposedly the most powerful man in the world, is actually expected to bow and 'submit'. They expected it in China, they got it. He did the same in other places. It's not lost on me that it is this first 'black' president that is expected to 'submit'. [Khadija: This is a disgrace.]

On the issue of his political appointments, part of the reason that there have been quite a few social faux pas is because the person responsible for 'updating' the president on such issues is the Chief protocol officer. Guess who she is. A die-hard Shrillary nut. She was appointed by Clinton as the post is under the State Department, but she is situated in the white house. Although she is supposed to, she doesn't fly with the president and her office was moved to the State department (from what I understand, that had something to do with Michelle, as she didn't trust the woman when it came to loyalty). [Khadija: A small bit of common sense.]

She had good reason not to, as this woman was a very active member of the PUMA lot, who were virulently anti-Obama. This is another reason why I think giving Clinton the SOS role was a mistake. She insisted that she should have the power to hire and fire as she pleased, a power which should solely belong to the president. Now she stuffed the state department full with her cronies. [Khadija: That's to be expected from everybody except naive, gullible Obama. But then again, Obama doesn't have any cronies of his own--for the reasons that I've covered in previous posts.]

I'm also amused when I see people talking about Hillary running in 2012. People forget that she is inexperienced. There is a reason why all of a sudden, the secretary of states responsibilities have been carved up, with envoys to various regions(Iraq, N. Korea etc) that do not report to Clinton. Being married to the president does not count as experience, especially as up to the point of being given the secretary of state job, she, like Obama, had very little to show for her political career. The silly mistakes she has made with Russia and the Israel/Palestinian issue (too long to go into now) are just one of the many signs that she is a lightweight. [Khadija: Yes, but as we saw with Bush, the actual quality of one's performance is not what matters. What matters is how one's performance is "spun" and marketed.]

Another problem with her is that she seems to reward people (e.g with jobs/political appointments) because of loyalty as opposed to whether or not they are actually capable. This can be seen in alot of the people she had running her failed campaign (start with patty solis doyle).

On the whole Latino issue, the only black folks that can still be deceived with such BS are the ones that are negroes! I've seen many of the 'solutions' that have been put forward to counter the racial discrimination of these Latinos, the most common being to learn spanish. As always happens, the necessary qualifications keep on shifting as black folks meet the mark. After you learn spanish, you find out it's 'native speakers only'. The problem is that black folks are only able to see solutions to problems through the lens of how others can help. [Khadija: African-Americans have been indoctrinated into believing that everybody--except White men--is our "friend."] Instead of trying to figure out how to get these folks to 'do right' by blacks, think of how to make it for yourself. [Khadija: YES!]

I remember during the campaign, when Obama said that parents should make their kids learn other languages. I though..yeah, they should. He then added, "especially spanish". Latinos got so happy. Black folks couldn't see the implications of this. Latinos would not dare openly discriminate against whites, but you know they are more than happy to tell blacks to their face where to stick it. I know this will sound harsh, but people should stop patronising the non-black owned businesses. Whenever one says it, 'they' accuse you of racism, ignoring the fact that they themselves (be it whites, latinos, asians) don't patronise black-owned business. Also, if you are going to support a black owned business, make sure that it supports you. I don't think I need to explain what I mean by that. [Khadija: No, you shouldn't have to explain this, but reciprocity is still a mysterious concept for most African-Americans.]

JaliliMaster, thank you for providing these essential Reader's Money Quotes!

From the "I Told You So" Department-Pres. Obama Watch Division

2010-01-20T00:44:00.016-06:00

I'm breaking my online semi-silence (until the new site launches) to give another warning and heads-up to those who will hear.

From the "I Told You So" Department-Pres. Obama Watch Division:

Those of you who have staked your futures on Pres. Obama and the “change” he promised, need to figure out what your Plan B will be when Pres. Obama completes the process of becoming a lame duck for the rest of this term. And also figure out what you'll do when he most likely fails to win reelection for a second term.

In “The Change That Never Came, Part 2,” I warned you about Pres. Obama in particular, and the general dangers inherent with Crossover Black politicians.
Here.

In “Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince’ Versus Pres. Obama’s ‘Team of Rivals’ Cabinet,” I warned about the indications of Pres. Obama’s naïveté.

In short, I warned you not to stake your survival on Pres. Obama:

“Don't stake your (and your loved ones') survival on anything that Pres. Obama might do. First of all, there's no way of knowing whether or not his economic proposals will actually work. Second, there are MANY other parties that don't want any of his proposals to succeed. Including many individuals that are nominally on his "side."

Pres. Obama Does NOT Have His Own Posse. Nobody is Watching His Back. This Means That Anything He Does WILL Be Sabotaged. From the Inside-Out.

I can see that the masses of our people will be devastated (in many different ways) when various factions from within as well as outside the Democratic Party finally pull down the Obama-ssiah.

It doesn't matter how much Pres. Obama tries to appease these factions. The problem is that these various factions cannot be appeased. This is because they don't want to be appeased. What they want is to make sure that whatever efforts the Obama-ssiah makes fail, and he gets ALL of the blame, while they position themselves to reign. . . err, rule. . . err, govern. . . once he's been politically destroyed.

This illustrates another problem with most Black folks' concept of politics. We don't understand that the "ruler" is only as strong as his infrastructure (aka "posse"). In Chicago terms, his political "machine." Does Pres. Obama actually have a loyal, faithful, strong posse of his own? Or is he somebody who was loaned the use of other people's posses? We know the answer to this.

It looks like he didn't understand that these various "retainers" are only loyal to the people who actually own and created them. They are loyal to the individuals who loaned them to him. NOT to him. He didn't create any of these people. This is one of the unspoken consequences of Pres. Obama being a crossover candidate who did not come from any sort of organized Black movement or infrastructure.

Black voters simply hopped on the Obama-ssiah bandwagon after they saw that Whites in Iowa were willing to vote for him. Pres. Obama did not come from us. Not that our infrastructure or organizations are particularly solid, but Pres. Obama has NOTHING but thin air under his feet.

Pres. Obama's recent blindsided stumbles with several cabinet nominees should be a signal to you. The manner in which all of that went down made it quite apparent to me that he doesn't have anybody who is actually watching his back. He doesn't even have an old-school, Chicago political "machine" to watch his back. That's his own fault for being naive.

Machiavelli warned about the dangers of a prince being dependent upon mercenaries. Especially foreign ones. They have a nasty habit of abruptly abandoning the prince (at the worst possible moment) in favor of the highest bidder, and/or their previous employers.

For the love of God, don't rely on this one (naive) man for your survival.”

And now, with this recent election for Ted Kennedy's former Senate seat (and its most likely repercussions), you're beginning to see all of these things come to a head.

It should be clear to those who have been counting on them, that the Democratic leadership will continue to roll over and try to placate everybody except their core constituencies. African-Americans (along with gays and lesbians) will continue to be among the first core constituencies thrown under the bus by the Democratic leadership. The Democrats will keep trying to placate people who are implacable; namely, Republicans and their supporters.

It’s time for those folks who are politically-inclined to begin the long-term project of building a viable third party, and related infrastructure (think tanks and media outlets that will support a progressive platform).

**Addendum** A helpful reader sent me the following link It's a good recap of how many (if not most) African-Americans focus on symbols instead of substance. Which is why all it takes is to have "Black faces in high places" (Black people in prominent, visible places) to pacify us.

A Standing Ovation For Rainebeaux's Work As a Guest Blogger At "Black Women Deserve Better"

2010-01-12T17:14:00.013-06:00

Various BWE (Black Women Empowerment) bloggers have been hosting ongoing, transformational conversations in support of abundant life for Black women. I'm always pleased to see African-American women add their voices to these conversations. I'm delighted whenever other Black women step out of the bystander role, and actively support this message by preaching the truth.

It can be intimidating to step up to the soapbox. That's why relatively few people do it. We often feel that we're not ready to preach the truth unless and until we feel as if we've "arrived." Meanwhile, a life's journey is never truly complete until death.

Rainebeaux's contributions have greatly added to the already-outstanding work that CW (blog host of Black Women Deserve Better) has been doing. So here's a standing ovation for Rainebeaux, who has been guestblogging over at Black Women Deserve Better. If you haven't already seen some of her posts, take a look at http://thecwexperience.wordpress.com/

"Every Shut Eye Ain't Sleep; Every Goodbye Ain't Gone," Part 1

2009-12-27T09:03:00.023-06:00

Hello, everyone! Happy New Year!

I'm delighted to announce the impending publication of the book of blog essays, along with the impending launch of a new site that will take the conversation forward regarding lifestyle optimization for African-American women. We've already covered the basic survival issues here, it's time to take it to the next level.

At the new site, I'm moving forward from covering basic survival issues into detailed discussions of optimal living. In fact, there’s a science to lifestyle optimization that I’ll discuss at length at the new site. Many of the tips and techniques that I’ll discuss come from the relatively new field of positive psychology. Positive psychology is the scientific study of what enables individuals and communities to thrive.

Because I believe that Black women need new visions in support of sane and serene living, this new site will also focus on writing and the publishing industry. I know that many of you have at least one good book inside you, waiting to be born.

Black women need new visions. We need to hear new voices. We need to hear your voice in your own creative works. With the new site, I’m also dedicating myself to helping other African-American writers through what I’ve learned—and what I’m still learning—about writing and publishing during my adventures as a new author. I’ll let you look over my shoulder, and have the benefit of “hindsight in advance.” The benefit of learning through my ongoing experiences.

Let me give you a small sneak preview. The very first post (the sample post) for the new site is 5 Elements of Money-Making Nonfiction Books. It explains some of the details of why nonfiction writers who want to earn a good living for themselves and their families don’t need to have their books on the best-sellers lists.

Entrepreneurial nonfiction authors know the real money does not come from book sales. Instead, the real money comes from “back-end” sales of other products (audio programs, newsletters, videos, special reports, teleseminars, boot camps, speaking engagements, personal coaching) mentioned in the books.

There are still a few things to be worked out with the new site and the book isn't out yet, but I think you'll be pleasantly surprised when it's all ready. I hope to have everything ready by the end of January 2010. I'll put up another announcement here when the new site and book have launched. In the meantime, you can bookmark the following link: http://www.sojournerspassport.com/

See you soon!

Peace and blessings,
Khadija

One Year Blog Anniversary, Farewell, and My Heartfelt Thanks

2009-09-20T16:14:00.003-05:00

I've said all along that there was a deadline with this blog, and that I wasn't going to do it indefinitely. Well, I've reached that point after a year of blogging. To manage the blog in the manner that I prefer to do so takes up a significant amount of time. Time that I now need to invest into other endeavors. And since I don't like to do "half-stepping," I've decided that now would be a good time to shut down the blog.

The conversations that we've had, and the mini-community that we've formed during this time, have greatly enriched my life. I've gained new ideas, insights and information that I wouldn't have gained otherwise. I've even gained some new goals (writing a novel) as a result of these conversations and your input. I can't possibly thank all of you enough for that. THANK YOU.

Peace and God's blessings be upon you,
Khadija

P.S. I hope that our various arks cross paths, and that I see you around on the high seas! LOL!

How Old Is Too Old? by Tom Kavala

2009-09-17T18:14:00.007-05:00

A resume client recently said to me, “Yeah, but I’m too old.”

I wanted to grab him by his lapels and shake some sense into him.

I’m here to tell you …

If there’s something you’ve always wanted to do – but have been putting off – now would be a good time to do it.

A woman once walked up to well-known author and inspirational speaker Wally (Famous) Amos, after a seminar he had given and said, “If I go to law school at my age, I’ll be 55 when I graduate.” Amos asked her, “How old will you be if you don’t go?”

So let me ask you a question, “If not now, when?”

Too Old For What?

Just what is it we’re supposed to be too old for anyway?

People will tell you that advancing age results in lower energy levels and diminished capacity for getting things done.

Really? Consider the following, courtesy of the UC Berkley Wellness Letter:

Verdi composed his “Ave Maria” at age 85.

Harlan Sanders started Kentucky Fried Chicken at the tender age of 65 and became a multi-millionaire.

Grandma Moses – the renowned American folk artist – didn’t start painting until she was in her 70s and didn’t achieve success until she was in her 80s.

Michelangelo was carving the Pieta when he was 89.

Martha Graham – one of the foremost pioneers of modern dance – performed until she was 75 and choreographed her 180th work at age 95.

Marion Hart, sportswoman and author, learned to fly at age 54 and made seven nonstop solo flights across the Atlantic, the last time in 1975 when she was 83.

John Kelley finished his sixtieth Boston Marathon at the age of 83.

Jack LaLanne, at age 62, swam the length of the Golden Gate Bridge underwater, against treacherous tides, towing a 2,000-pound boat. At age 65, he was swimming in Lake Ashinoko, Japan, handcuffed, shackled and towing sixty-five boats loaded with 6,500 pounds of Louisiana wood pulp! At age 70, once again handcuffed and shackled, and fighting blustery winds and currents, LaLanne hit the water and succeeded in pulling seventy boats and seventy people – one person per boat – an astonishing one and one-half miles.

The remarkable accomplishments of these people are not just personal triumphs; rather they are triumphs of the human spirit. They demonstrate that whether you start early or late in life, you can accomplish anything you put your mind to. Whatever you can conceive, you can achieve – regardless of age.

Forget Those Who Say You Can’t

I wonder why so few people feel their age is “just right.”

Being “too old” is just an excuse – an excuse that has closed the door of opportunity to thousands of individuals. They think they are the wrong age, so they don’t even try.

I hear all kinds of people saying you reach a point where starting over, or starting a new endeavor, just isn’t practical anymore.

Let me tell you something – people who know the least, know it the loudest.

The person who is fond of saying, “It can’t be done,” is invariably interrupted by the person who just did it.

When I was a corporate sales trainer, an older salesperson – who should have known better – told me that I didn’t understand the circumstances he was under.

I asked him, “The circumstances you’re under? What are you doing under there? Get out from under there! Who told you to go under there in the first place?”

There are no circumstances you can’t handle. There are only challenges to be met. Every challenge contains within it an opportunity for you to excel.

Start Where You Are

However old you are – you are. So look at your age positively.

A friend of mine, who just turned 70, confided to me that he hated the thought of getting old. I told him it was a lot better than the alternative. If you’re not getting older, you’re dead. I’ll take old over dead any day of the week.

Instead of thinking, “I’m already too old,” think, “I’m still young.” Look forward to new horizons and gain enthusiasm for new things.

Invest time in doing what you really want to do. Whether you’re 29 or 69, it’s never too late. So stop thinking, “I should have started years ago.” You’re here now, so start now. Your best years are ahead of you.

Just ask our own Shelby Beckett. The newest addition to AWAI’s Wall of Fame, Shelby didn’t start copy writing until she was 71. In fact, if you check out the Wall of Fame, you’ll see a lot of gray hair there.

Think about how much productive time you have left.

If your life was an hourglass and you could see the sand passing through it, what would you do today?

The cemetery is full of unwritten books, unsung songs, great deeds left undone, and discoveries never made. Most people die with their dreams still in them. Don’t let the “too old” excuse keep you from living the life you’ve always wanted.

"For of all sad words, of tongues or pen, the saddest are these: I might have been . . ."

This article appears courtesy of American Writers & Artists Inc.’s (AWAI) Spare_Time Biz Success, a free newsletter that gives you information on the hottest work_at_home opportunities that allow you to make extra money in your spare time and enjoy the financial benefits of a full_time career. For a complimentary subscription, visit http://www.awaionline.com/signup/spare_time_business/.

_____________________________________________

Khadija speaking: This article is for the "grown folks" in the house who are feeling the "melancholy setting sun." You know, the feeling that sets in when you figure that you've got more life behind you than left ahead of you. And that you've already squandered whatever opportunities were available to you in your youth.

I'm saying: So what? At this point, what does it really matter what came before? As the essay author said, "You're here now." I believe that this is all that actually matters NOW. You're blessed to be here now. There are a lot of folks who aren't here now. They're already dead. I know people my age who are already dead. I'm sure you also have some peers who are dead. Dead is dead. I have no interest in being dead before I'm officially dead.

I feel that this entire essay needs to be posted on a lot of folks' refrigerators and doors, but I especially liked the point the author made about "the circumstances that we're under." He's right: If you're operating under some circumstances that are hindering your attainment of abundant life, then you need to get OUT from under those circumstances! It will definitely take effort, and it might take longer than you want, but you need to get OUT from under there!

I don't know about you, but I would prefer to have Col. Sanders' wealth when I'm elderly as opposed to not having it. When I'm elderly, I would prefer to be as fit as Jack LaLanne is.

I would prefer to enjoy my very own "New World" of abundant life for however many years I have left. Wouldn't you?

Forget Those Who Say That You Can't by Tom Kavala

2009-09-15T07:07:00.004-05:00

"Tell me who your best friends are and I'll tell you who you are. The people you associate with most – whether professionally or socially – can have a motivating or de-motivating effect on you. Especially when you're trying to make a comeback from a setback.

Some folks have a perpetually positive attitude and are natural motivators. Others are so negative they brighten a room just by leaving it.

The simple but true fact of life is that you become like those with whom you associate most closely – for good or bad. Sometimes it's better to be alone than in the wrong company.

A quick story …

It was great to be home! I'd been living and working in Europe for two years and this was my first vacation.

We were sitting around the dinner table talking and laughing – having a great time really. Right up until I dropped the bomb.

"I'm going to take up skydiving."

It was like somebody had hit the "Pause" button. Everybody froze.

My mother, my brother and my twenty or thirty assorted aunts, uncles and cousins all asked – almost as one – "Are you out of your mind?"

They then proceeded to tell me every single "Crash and Burn, Death by Falling" story the world has ever known. The funny thing is none of them were skydivers.

Today I have 135 or so parachute jumps under my belt. That's not a lot by some standards, but it's okay for me.

I've jumped out of helicopters, hot air balloons, jets and prop jobs … I've jumped from as low as 1,500 feet and from as high as 21,000 feet … I've jumped static-line and free-fall … and I've often thought back to that night around the dinner table. How much I would have missed, had I let my family steal my dream!

The Only Expert About You is You!

I have discovered that an important characteristic of successful people is their impatience with negative thinking and negative acting people.

Anytime you try to pull ahead of the pack and accomplish something great, there will undoubtedly be people who don't think you can do it. Such naysayers are all too common.
Some of your friends will not want you to go on. They will want you to stay where they are. Friends that don't help you to climb will make you crawl, if you let them. Your friends will either stretch your vision or choke your dream. Those that don't increase you will eventually decrease you.

So never receive counsel from unproductive people – they are not qualified to comment.

On The Road to Success, Be Careful Who You Ask for Directions

If your doctor told you that you needed an operation, you'd probably want to get a second opinion before undergoing surgery. Who would you ask? Your auto mechanic? Your brother, the fireman? Maybe Aunt Gladys? Of course not! You'd ask another doctor – somebody who knows something about medicine.

Never discuss your problems with someone incapable of contributing to the solution, because those who never succeeded themselves are always the first to tell you how. Not everyone has a right to speak into your life. You'll always get the worst of the bargain if you exchange ideas with the wrong person.

When I was thinking about quitting my job as a business consultant and going full time as a copywriter, my family told me they thought I was crazy – again.

I love them, but I don't give a hoot what they think. I care what Michael Masterson, Don Mahoney, and Paul Hollingshead think. I want to know what Dan Kennedy, Herschell Gordon Lewis and Bob Bly think. I want to know what Joshua Boswell thinks. Why? Because they have done what I want to do.

Billionaire J. Paul Getty said it best, "The easiest way to get rich is to find somebody who is rich and do what they did."

Don't follow anyone who isn't going places. With some people you merely spend an evening – with others you invest it.

If You're at a Crossroads, You're in Good Company

It's not what the naysayers say that is important, it's what you believe that really counts. So let me ask you, what do you believe?

Maybe you're at a crossroads and not sure if you can do it or not. That's okay. Look at some folks who got off to a slow start, had more than their share of detractors, and still did okay:

Albert Einstein didn't speak until he was nearly 5 years old and was considered "mentally slow."
The inventor of the steam engine, James Watt, was declared "dull and inept."

Cartoonist Walt Disney was fired from his first job because he "had no imagination."

Inventor Thomas Edison was kicked out of school at age 9 because he was at the bottom of his class.

Basketball legend Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team.

Sometimes the experts – and other well-meaning people – are misguided in their efforts or just plain wrong in their thinking. And then there are some people who are just stuck on stupid.
You can measure IQ, but not "want to." It's not the size of the dog in the fight that's important, it's the size of the fight in the dog. They can measure the size your head but not size of the dream in your heart.

So follow your heart as you use your head to develop skills and talents. There is nothing that an inspired you cannot accomplish.

One Last Question …

Are you on course toward your goals, or is the "FUD Factor' (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) casting a shadow on your direction?

In 1492, despite repeated setbacks, and in the face of conventional wisdom, Christopher Columbus set his course in the direction that his own inspiration and intelligence led him to believe was the right one.

During his quest across the dangerous and uncharted North Atlantic, he wrote these words in his private log, "This day, we sailed on."

He knew that a ship in port is usually safe … but that's not what ships are built for. What are you built for? What great accomplishments are yours to fulfill?

Invest the time NOW to renew your commitment to overcoming past failures, including the fears, uncertainty and doubt placed there by the conventional wisdom of unqualified, negative people.

Go ahead and give yourself a chance to succeed by taking another shot – or two, or three. It's not over 'til you win. Chart a bold course for yourself and sail on! Who knows? One more effort might be all it takes to get you back on course to your own New World.

And One Final Thought …

People are like rubber bands. A rubber band, lying around on a desk somewhere doesn't do anything. But once picked up and stretched, it becomes useful. Once stretched and let go, it gains the potential to fly over much greater distances than before.

It is only when you stretch yourself that you begin to discover your ability to fly much farther than you might have imagined.

Are you stretching yourself? You have an unparalleled opportunity to surround yourself with people who can help your writing career take a quantum leap forward … people you can dream aloud in front of … people who can bring out the best in you.

I'm talking about AWAI's 2009 FastTrack to Copywriting Success Bootcamp and Job Fair – where a single conversation with the right person can be more valuable to you than many years of study.

Self-made billionaire J. Paul Getty once observed that your income will be the average of income of the five people with whom you associate most closely. Maybe it's time for you to stretch yourself and get some new friends. Sign up for Bootcamp while there are still slots available. I'm going to be there. Don't delay – sign up now!

Special Offer: To hear Tom's business-building insights and advice every Tuesday, sign up a free subscription to Spare-Time Biz Success.

This article appears courtesy of American Writers & Artists Inc.’s (AWAI) The Golden Thread, a free newsletter that delivers original, no-nonsense advice on the best wealth careers, lifestyle careers and work-at-home careers available. For a complimentary subscription, visit http://www.blogger.com/signup/."

________________________________

Khadija speaking: Sales pitch aside, this essay has a LOT of valuable food for thought. I hope you'll take the time to seriously consider some of the points the author raised.

Black Women: Why Do You Let "Becky, Lupe, J Lo, Fatima, and Mei Ling" Indirectly Pimp YOU?

2009-09-13T14:42:00.020-05:00

A Picture Is Worth 1,000 Words: Another One Of The Black Men That Black Women BLINDLY Rush To Support-Van Jones and Family

2009-09-12T14:45:00.039-05:00

A family photo from Mr. Jones' Facebook page.

Too many African-American women have the knee-jerk habit of blindly running to support any and all African-American males who are in trouble with Whites. You need to STOP doing that. It would better serve your interests if you learned how to take a breath, take a step back, and carefully consider whether or not the current "Black male who's in trouble with White folks" is of any real value to you before you respond.

You also need to STOP assuming that there's automatically some sort of connection between you and random African-American males. There is NO automatic connection anymore. African-American men destroyed that connection by their behavior decades ago. 'Nuff said. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Van-Jones/30042869909

***Addendum*** My main point with this is something that another blogger named Halima Anderson explained in this excellent post: http://dateawhiteguy.blogspot.com/2009/07/give-it-up-or-embrace-fruits-thereof.html

You need to understand that many African-American men are assigning YOU demeaning roles and reduced status based upon White supremacy.

This means that for many African-American males, when it comes to choosing a woman to protect and provide for they select non-Black women* as the women they pamper. But when it comes to looking for a woman to rescue them and do heavy lifting, THEN these same men look to YOU. And you cooperate with this workhorse status when you support these males!

Halima gave the excellent example of contrasting who Michael Jackson selected to reap the benefits (monetary and otherwise) of being the "mommies" of his children (a series of White women), versus who he selected to do the hard work and heavy lifting of being the "mammies" (actual caretakers) of his children (a series of Black women).

[*Also known as "Becky, Lupe, J Lo, Fatima, and Mei Ling." LOL!]

***Audience Note*** NO anonymous comments will be published for this post.

Let's Get Serious About Vetting Men, Part 3: Screen OUT Men Who Say That Women Won't "Let" Them Be Men, Gentlemen, Etc.

2009-09-09T17:35:00.034-05:00

The Time To Act Is Now

2009-09-07T17:04:00.024-05:00

The time to act is now.

Several Black Women's Empowerment blogs are providing you with excellent opportunities to brainstorm things that many of you can't discuss anywhere else. And to have these discussions in a supportive, encouraging environment that doesn't exist in many other places.

The people who've taken the time and energy to provide these services won't do so forever.

The people who've been warning you about the Rwanda-style meltdowns that are coming soon to an all-Black residential area near you won't do so forever. You've been warned to build your own ark, or find a seat on somebody else's ark, if you want to survive and thrive.

Throughout history, no matter what the event, there have always been the smaller group of people who were relatively safe and comfortable while the masses of their group suffered. Preparation versus a lack of preparation is what usually separates the two groups. If you choose not to prepare, and choose not to respond to the warning, rest assured that there WON'T be any particular mercy or concern for you once the flood waters rise above your heads. Think quick: When was the last time YOU thought about the still-suffering people of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast? Yeah, that's what I thought.

Part of the reason why I'm doing my part to sound the alarm now is so that my conscience will be totally clear when the final demise of the African-American collective arrives. Because once I finish my part of sounding the alarm, I'm NOT going to give any further thought to any of these avoidable tragedies.

Years ago, I stopped listening to the local news for this reason. And I rarely read the news clippings that people send me of the latest atrocities that are happening in Black residential areas. The pace and number of these atrocities will only increase until the final Rwanda-style meltdowns begin.

As far as I'm concerned, it's not productive to read or talk about any of that anymore---not unless somebody intends to do something concrete like organize fundraisers and other support for the victims. But doing something tangible is not our usual style. Most of us prefer to wring our hands and look for somebody else to address the problem. There's no more time for that. The only thing that matters is to get as far removed from striking distance of the Black underclass as possible.

I'm currently upgrading MY "ark" into a luxury cruise ark---"Sovereign of the Seas--LOL! I plan to sip sparkling apple cider on the deck of my cruise-ark while the hardheaded African-American masses (who failed to take heed of various warnings) drown in the flood waters. I will calmly sip my sparkling apple cider in the knowledge that I did my part to warn and assist them before the flood waters rose over their heads. That's all that anybody can do. As various ships pass each other, I hope to wave to you while you're relaxing on the deck of your ark as the Sojourners sail the seas in style!

***Addendum*** To help get your creative ideas flowing, now is a good time to revisit a couple of posts from January. "Wildest Dreams Checklikst: Start Asking Yourself EMPOWERING Questions" http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/01/wildest-dreams-checklist-start-asking.html and "Beverly is Living Out Her Wildest Dreams in Paris. What Are YOU Waiting For?" http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/01/beverly-is-living-out-her-wildest.html

Let's Get Serious About Vetting Men, Part 2: The Deficits Created By Fatherlessness Are NOT "Equal" Between The Genders

2009-09-06T16:23:00.016-05:00

Let's Get Serious About Vetting Men, Part 1: Do You Really Want A Fatherless Man To Be The Father Of YOUR Children?

2009-09-05T12:11:00.022-05:00

The "Change" That Never Came, Part 3: "The Immorality of Lesser Evilism" by Rabbi Michael Lerner

2009-09-04T13:01:00.007-05:00

"The Immorality of Lesser Evilism
By Rabbi Michael Lerner
November 03, 2000

Even in the final days of the presidential election, a substantial part of the population expresses dismay at the major candidates, feels closer to Nader in terms of the issues he raises, but fears that a vote for him might increase the chances for a Bush presidency. And the same issue arises for those who respond to the message of a Buchanan or John Haegelin. I've seen friends and families rent apart by the anger of some Gore supporters who believe that Nader supporters have lost their moral compass in their inability to see how disastrous a world with Bush-appointed Supreme Court justices might be.

Yet lesser evilism may do more to destroy the moral fabric and political viability of a democracy than any real or imagined evil that might be achieved through the electoral victory of whoever we imagine to be the "bad guy" beneficiary of voting our conscience. Here are some reasons why:

First, Lesser evilism leads to a moral and spiritual corruption of our souls. The habit of voting lesser evil in politics is a slippery slope. We start by giving our vote to a candidate who supports and is a product of a social reality that we actually deplore, and we end up learning to accommodate ourselves to moral corruption in other aspects of our lives. Just as lesser evilism teaches us to accommodate to "reality" in politics, so we accommodate to the reality of our economic marketplace, with its ethos of materialism and selfishness. Since everyone else is "looking out for number one," we learn that the way to "make it" is to go along with a set of practices that involve cheating or hurting others in our pursuit of success, making environmentally destructive or morally insensitive choices, and using the excuse that we must focus on "the bottom line" and not on the fine points of moral behavior.

To the extent that we come to believe that we have no alternative but to accept the lesser evil, we lose the inner quality of soul that makes it possible to fight for anything against the odds. We forget how to stand up for our own ideals, and soon we don't see the point in even thinking about what kind of a world we really believe in ("it's so unrealistic"). Internally we may feel cynical about the world we live in, but as long as we've adopted the attitude that we can't really fight it and must accept its terms, we have cast our vote in favor of keeping what is. Moral courage and hope begin to feel like anachronistic concepts.

Not surprisingly, as people become used to making this choice in daily life, they become most angry not at the forces of evil to which they accommodate, but at those who retain their commitment to fight for their highest ideal. Thus, the rage in liberal circles at Nader supporters or in conservative circles at Buchanan supporters-both of whom insist on standing for their ideals even when they are unlikely to win.

Second, lesser evilism disempowers liberal and progressive forces because it gives the Democratic Party no incentive to respond to progressive ideals. Secure in the certainty that liberals will always respond to the demand of lesser evilism, the Democrats can put their full attention at repositioning their party to accommodate those who might otherwise vote Republican, thus dramatically decreasing the differences between the two parties. And your vote for a lesser evil gives the corporate media the excuse they seek to ignore progressive views throughout the next four years-because the media will say that your progressive views were shown to have no real constituency since you and others didn't vote for the candidates who articulated those views, but chose to empower people who champion the status quo.

Third, lesser evilism is based on an arrogant certainty about the consequences of your lesser evil winning. In fact, those of us who voted for Clinton as the lesser evil in 1992 found that eight years later the gap between the rich and the poor had increased and the social supports for the poor had decreased. Conversely, much as Richard Nixon hurt me personally (by indicting me and sending me to prison for anti-war organizing), the dynamics of his "greater evil" presidency were significantly constrained by an idealistic social movement-and in that context, Nixon responded by recognizing China and by supporting powerful environmental and worker-safety legislation that were whittled down under the Clinton administration. It is the absence or presence of the very kind of social movement that is decisive-and lesser-evilism destroys. Instead of being so sure that "the other guy" is going to destroy the world, better to have a little humility and vote your conscience rather than your crystal ball, because in so doing you make possible a whole different configuration of political possibilities.

Fourth, lesser evilism weakens faith in democracy. If people consistently feel obliged to vote for candidates in whom they do not believe, they end up feeling they are without representation, and hence feel that our government itself is less legitimate. Many stop voting altogether. Others feel dirtied by a process in which they have authorized through their vote the actions of an elected official who, acting in their name, supports policies like the death penalty and acceleration of the worst aspects of globalization, which they actually find morally and environmentally reprehensible.

Finally, voting for a lesser evil entails abandoning and helping to dispirit those who share your principles. Many Nader people are standing up for the principles that you believe in, and instead of supporting them for doing so you are attacking them. Don't be surprised if many these people eventually give up on trying to change the world. So the next time you look around for allies for some visionary idea or moral cause that inspires you, you will find fewer people ready to take risks, and ironically you may then use that to convince yourself that nothing was ever possible and that's why you "had" to vote for the lesser of two evils.

None of this is an argument against those who really are excited by Gore or Bush-they should vote their beliefs. But those who succumb to the fear tactics that intimidate us into voting for someone whose policies are often far from our own beliefs are actually doing a great disservice to their country, their fellow citizens, and their own inner moral integrity."

Rabbi Michael Lerner is editor of TIKKUN Magazine, author of Spirit Matters: Global Healing and the Wisdom of the Soul, and rabbi of Beyt Tikkun synagogue in San Francisco.
__________________________________________

Khadija speaking: Pres. Obama just might be the LAST "lesser evil" vote that I ever cast.

The "Change" That Never Came, Part 2: Pres. Obama Keeps Bush Nominees In Top Posts

2009-09-04T07:01:00.002-05:00

From the Associate Press (emphasis added and my comments are in blue):

"Analysis: Obama keeps Bush nominees in top posts

By TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer Tom Raum, Associated Press Writer Mon Aug 31, 4:11 pm ET

WASHINGTON – For all the GOP howling about Barack Obama radically steering the government to the left and leading the nation toward socialism, some of his major appointments are Republican men and women of the middle.

In what may be the top two national posts in light of today's crises at home and abroad, Obama stuck with the picks of former President George W. Bush in reappointing Fed chief Ben Bernanke and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Bernanke last week was given another four-year term to preside over nothing less than saving the U.S. economy and then keeping it strong. He was appointed by Bush in 2006 after a short stint as chairman of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers. Gates was kept in his Pentagon post to wind down the war in Iraq and build up the one in Afghanistan.

The loss of Sen. Ted Kennedy to brain cancer led to a chorus of laments about the dearth of politicians these days able to reach across party lines. While Obama hasn't had much luck with the highly polarized Congress in building bipartisan support on legislation, he's reached out often to Republicans in filling key jobs. [Khadija: So, basically he rewards the opposing party---whose leaders have told hysterical lies about his initiatives---we do remember the screams about "death panels"--- by appointing their people to high posts. Right. Sure.]

The notion that he's moving the government to the left "is laughable, it's utterly laughable," said Thomas E. Mann, a government scholar at the Brookings Institution. Mann said the decision to keep Bernanke and Gates "doesn't buy him a thing with Republicans but was a sign of good judgment in both cases" because Bernanke and Gates were doing good jobs.

Obama's larger problem is that he still does not have his own people in a majority of the government's top policymaking positions requiring Senate confirmation. But those he has put in top positions include a number of Republicans or nontraditional Democrats (Khadija speaking: In other words, Democrats in name only).

Along with Gates and Bernanke, they include:

-Sheila Bair as holdover chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. She has played a major role in the management of the financial crisis. A one-time unsuccessful candidate for a Kansas House seat, Bair was first appointed by Bush in June 2006. Forbes Magazine ranks her as the second most powerful woman in the world behind German chancellor Angela Merkel.

-Ray LaHood, a former congressman from Illinois, as transportation secretary. He was elected as part of the "Gingrich Revolution" of 1994 and was so trusted by both Republicans and Democrats that he was selected to preside over the House during the impeachment vote against President Bill Clinton.

-Former Rep. John McHugh from upstate New York, as Army secretary. McHugh was known by his House colleagues for an even temperament and willingness to work with Democrats.

-Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who was a Mormon missionary in China in his youth, as ambassador to China.

-Francis Collins, an evangelical Christian, as director of the National Institutes of Health. Unlike the others on the list, Collins is not a Republican and worked in the Obama presidential campaign. But he doesn't fit the usual mold of liberal Democrat as portrayed by many Republicans.

[Khadija speaking: Lovely. Just lovely. Is this what we voted for when we voted for Obama? Furthermore, I find it difficult to believe that these Republicans and non-Democrat-Democrats are the best that can be found for these positions. ]

/snip/. . . Republicans are going all out on the war path, especially on health care overhaul and budget issues. [Yes, meanwhile Pres. Obama continues to suck up to these people. Think quick: When, if ever, did former Pres. Bush "reach out" to non-Republicans? He didn't. Bush governed as if he had been elected by a landslide or a clear majority of the voters, even though he wasn't.

Why is Pres. Obama acting like a beggar in what's supposed to be his own house? Answer: Because he's inherently weak. A people pleaser. And most importantly, he's a Crossover Negro Politician who does NOT have his own independent power base.

There are multiple things going on in this situation. There are some things going on that are particular to Pres. Obama:

*weak, people-pleaser personality

*half-White & half-foreign Black

*raised by Whites

*didn't grow up among African-Americans, therefore no natural African-American posse from childhood/high school/parents' friends, etc.

*only really exposed to African-Americans as an adult

And then there are some things that apply to almost ALL crossover Black politicians:

*didn't pay any "dues" in any Black organization or movement

*no Black "posse"/troops as a result of the above

*primarily focused on being perceived as "non-threatening" by Whites

*no Black "posse"/troops as a result of the above

I think this situation is exposing some of the costs of being a disconnected, crossover Black politician. Basically, Pres. Obama doesn't have a natural posse because he was dropped in by parachute among us.

Because he never formed a natural, Black posse, there's nobody around him that HE created and lifted up. NOBODY owes him. Meanwhile, he owes many, many other people and political "princes." Pres. Obama's situation is somewhat more extreme than "typical" African-American crossover politicians because of his family background. Typical African-American crossover politicians at least have Black potential posse members that they grew up with, or are friends of the family, etc.]

'Obama and his liberal congressional allies want to saddle taxpayers with even more debt through their government-run health care experiment that will cost trillions of dollars,' said Republican party chief Michael Steele. House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, accused Obama of a management style that's 'not leadership, it's negligence.' Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., said in Saturday's GOP video and Internet address that Obama's Democrats favor 'cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from the elderly to create new government programs.'

/snip/. . . At the time he announced he was sticking with Gates at the Pentagon, Obama said he didn't ask the member of the Bush war cabinet to remain because of his party affiliation but because he felt he could best 'serve the interests of the American people.' Obama said he was 'going to be welcoming a vigorous debate inside the White House.'" [Khadija: You can read the rest of the story here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090831/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_s_republicans_analysis;_ylt=Ahyts12P2PmO4dHO8KA.3SID5gcF;_ylu=X3oDMTM1bzY3dHI2BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwODMxL3VzX29iYW1hX3NfcmVwdWJsaWNhbnNfYW5hbHlzaXMEcG9zAzMEc2VjA3luX3BhZ2luYXRlX3N1bW1hcnlfbGlzdARzbGsDYW5hbHlzaXNvYmFt

This is looking more and more like what others have called "the status quo that we can believe in."

Why It's Important To Have Dating Experiences In College: Readers' Money Quotes From Lisa99 & Tertiaryanna

2009-09-02T07:17:00.022-05:00

The Skills Needed In Order To Move On: An Extended Reader's Money Quote From Evia

2009-09-01T00:21:00.005-05:00

There's a very useful quote:

“If you would not have affliction visit you twice, listen at once to what it teaches.” –by James Burgh (1714-1775), a Scottish author.

If you are an African-American woman who is currently displeased with what you are experiencing within all-African-American social and dating circles, you need to "listen at once" to what this negative experience ("affliction") is teaching you.

If you're paying attention and willing to learn, this "affliction" is teaching you to GET OUT, MOVE ON, and EXPAND YOUR NETWORKS to include healthier people and places within the global village. Evia, blog host of Black Female Interracial Marriage Ezine talked about the necessity of moving on in a recent post: http://www.blackfemaleinterracialmarriage.com/2009/08/living-well-marriage.html

In order to successfully transition to the global village of social networks, you're probably going to have to make some adjustments in how you respond to the global village. I notice that people often want to keep doing whatever they've been doing, and yet somehow get a different result. Come on, now. Intellectually, we all know that this does not work.

The Reader's Money Quote is a statement that is of such insight and importance that it merits frequent and loud repetition. During a recent blog discussion, Evia responded to several other commenters and said:

"22!? who the hell marries at 22?? [quote from another commenter]

When, I urge young bw to ***POSITION*** themselves early in their 20s (or earlier) toward marriage, I'm DEFINITELY not encouraging bw to get married at 22! I just want to make that clear. Also, this advice is only intended for those bw who actually WANT marriage. LOL!

As an old-school AA southern women, let me point out that since we were expected to get married, black teen girls (of a certain class--Oops--did I say "class"? LOL) made decisions all along that kept their path to marriage open. For ex.,they guarded their reputation; they put emphasis on looking attractive at all times in public, they behaved with decorum at all times in public, they behaved towards men in a friendly, polite, and definitely flirtatious manner (towards appealing men especially) or were never crude or rude towards men at all.

As a result of my upbringing during that time, I can flirt bigtime with any man because I saw girls and women doing this all the time around me. It was just one of the main ways that women reacted towards men. I'm talking about ***mild*** flirtatious banter which included 'come hither' body language, but not licking your lips or anything overt. ALL men react positively towards a flirtatious woman. If I, even at my age, started flirting with an 18 year old male, he is going to respond positively towards me. Males are wired in this way.

However, it seems--from the notes I get from bw--that this is a lost art. Old school bw (of a certain class) were subtle, but focused on uplifting themselves. There have always been more than enough DBR males of all types around women of all groups. Period. However, we were taught to stay away from DBRs. PERIOD. And were PUNISHED in various ways if we didn't. Old school black people did NOT have pity parties for DBR males. Too much was at stake. They didn't excuse them because ALL black people dealt with the blows of racism. ALL of us. Old school black mothers warned their daughters to stay away from loser men, who they did NOT hesitate to call "NO GOOD." So, young bw (of a certain class) were NOT confused, as so many bw are today."
_______________________________________

"BUT! I have known many black girls at my own institution that were NOT the "nothin but a black man type" and were still unable to get a date. [quote from another reader]

I hear this comment a lot and before I say anything further, let me say that I know that ***some** wm are not asking bw out due to straight up RACISM, but racism is nothing new. And I certainly have NEVER advocated that bw mingle with racist wm.

But the following factors are areas that AA women are going to have to address and work diligently to change.

1. Bw shooting themselves in the foot with their mouths/keyboards. Bw broadcast too many self-destructive, self-defeating messages and it's assumed by folks who hear these messages that many other bw agree. For ex. I continue to read variations of the comment: "I don't want no white boy!" or "I'm not attracted to wm." These proclamations are deadly because wm know that the comment expresses the sentiments of countless other AA women. Also, typical AA women say and do NOTHING to counteract these proclamations. If there were ww making these same kinds of deadly proclamations about the undesirability of bm publicly, even bm who worship ww would never approach ww. Therefore many wm genuinely DO NOT BELIEVE that a typical black woman is interested in dating wm. Wm write to me asking me whether bw "really" like them. Also wm have lots of other choices of women, so they don't need to dig deeper to see how pervasive these sentiments are among bw.

2. Many bw are "CLOSED" to WM. Thanks for that term, Halima. It's something I notice all of the time. Bw are not friendly and flirtatious towards wm. The fact is that MANY bw are not friendly and flirtatious towards ANY man. I know WHY this is the case, but I'm talking about the "WHAT." How many of y'all can just be in the supermarket produce section and make a casual comment towards a wm who also standing there? How many of y'all can smile at a wm and engage in lighthearted banter with a wm? And wm have lots of other choices of women who ARE friendly and flirtatious towards them.

3. Many bw are still not comfortable with wm liking the way ***some*** bw look: big behinds, dark skin, tightly coiled (aka "nappy" hair) etc.

4. Many bw these days have self-esteem issues derived MAINLY from their "black" upbringing. Many bw obviously STILL see themselves through the eyes of damaged bm who worship euro looks/beauty and have decreed that "it's euro looks or nothing!" Therefore many bw CANNOT believe that wm see them as desirable women. Many of these women write to me with questions about their hair, skin shades, noses, lips (well not so much now that Angelina has made "big" lips sexy), etc. Yes, I realize that racist wm started the "black women are not beautiful" MYTH, but it's racist AA men who have carved this in stone in the minds of typical young bw and continue to reinforce it.

Many AA women need to just drop everything and get away from the bc and damaged black social circles as fast as they can because they cannot free themselves of these negative perceptions of themselves as long as they're around other blacks who have accepted these negative perceptions as facts. This is CRITICAL.

For ex., I consider my West-African featured looks to be quite attractive and this has been constantly reinforced by mainly African and white men who've constantly told me this and shown me with their TREATMENT of me that I'm desirable. I've mostly mingled with African and white men throughout my dating life. It's very clear to me that if I'd mingled mostly with AA males, I'd believe I'm unattractive, just as so many West-African featured young AA women do."

Evia, thank you for this extended Reader's Money Quote!

***AUDIENCE NOTE***Please be advised that I WON'T post any anonymous comments for this conversation. Because doing so would be unfair to the people who are being quite brave AND generous in sharing their thoughts and experiences about this very sensitive issue. Peace, blessings and solidarity.

Dear Voyeur, Just So You Know: My Readers Are Kind Enough To Watch Out On My Behalf

2009-08-31T17:41:00.011-05:00

I ignore many of the unpleasant things that come with running an activist blog. I try to maintain self-discipline and focus on the mission profile for this blog. However, I've decided to indulge myself for a minute this time. [Audience Note: Don't worry. This sort of self-indulgence won't become a habit here. It'll probably be just this one time. But it sho' feels good! LOL!] Here's a comment that I made during a recent blog discussion:

"I also greatly enjoy these conversations. And I'm also not looking for "total agreement." I'm just interested in what Min. Farrakhan referred to as operational unity. As in being like-minded enough to be able to brainstorm and strategize together.

It's interesting. I ran across a new group of voyeurs who are reading these conversations. And I call them "voyeurs" because they don't sound as if they have any real stake in the issues that we discuss here. They read our discussions about AA women's suffering for entertainment.

I was tickled to read that they feel that I'm a poor writer, and that the essays are poorly written. LOL! What voyeurs usually don't understand is that these conversations aren't primarily about entertainment for the people who are affected by the issues under discussion. I know that I don't write these (apparently poorly written---{chuckling}) posts for entertainment value.

This is activism in support of a struggle. Specifically the struggle for abundant lives for AA women and girls. This means that I don't let opponents of abundant life for AA women and girls to use this platform. This means that there's NO open mic here for the Klan, or Nazis, or wife/woman beaters, or sexual predators, or extreme male sexists. Would anybody expect Min. Farrakhan's ministers to hand their microphone over to a White racist during one of their meetings? Umm...no. Well, the same idea applies here.

At least one voyeur is confused about this. I suspect that part of the reason why the voyeur is confused about this refusal to give the mic to opponents is because this person has probably never participated in any sort of activism. This angle came up during the first Table Talk For Activists post. We currently have a couple of generations of AAs (and others) who have never seen any sort of "movement" activities up close and personal. So, they're confused."

I'm blessed to have a readership that actively looks out for me; and I TRULY appreciate that. This means that they often send me links to other blog discussions that make reference to the conversations here. Positive or negative. Including the other blog with the "voyeurs" that I referenced in the above comment.

Well, from what I've seen, it seems that the above-referenced "voyeur" is now angry about my comment regarding him/her/it. [I didn't bother to read it through.] {chuckling} It always tickles me to see how thin-skinned so many critical people are: They CAN'T take even a smidgen of what they so freely dish out in reference to others.

The Catalog Of Ethical Insanity, Part 1: Down Low Detectives & Down Low Enablers

2009-08-30T10:02:00.009-05:00

Before psychiatry had the concept of psychopaths, there was what used to be called "moral insanity:

""The term 'moral insanity' is unfamiliar to psychiatrists today, but it was an accepted diagnosis in Europe and America throughout most of the 19th century. As late as 1883, the American Journal of Insanity (forerunner of the American Journal of Psychiatry) published an article titled 'Moral Insanity.' Individuals who retained their intellectual capacity but harbored strange and unrealistic ideas had puzzled European physicians of the 18th century.

. . . Dr. J.C. Prichard (1786-1848) of England is credited with being the first to use the term moral insanity. In 1835 he wrote: 'There is a form of mental derangement in which the intellectual faculties [are uninjured], while the disorder is manifested principally or alone in the state of feelings, temper, or habits. . .The moral. . . principles of the mind. . . are depraved or perverted, the power of self-government is lost or greatly impaired, and the individual is. . . incapable. . . of conducting himself with decency and propriety in the business of life.'"

Moral Insanity: A Brief History, by Lucy Ozarin, M.D., M.P.H., Psychiatric News May 18, 2001Volume 36 Number 10, American Psychiatric Association, p. 21.

Since I don't like the ugly connotations that right-wing, Christian religious fanatics have created around the word "moral," let's call it ethical insanity. I think that in many ways it's a better term than "sociopath/psychopath" because it gives a more precise flavor of what's wrong with so many people. I think the term "ethical insanity" also helps us to see the nuances between people who aren't quite psychopaths, yet are still far outside the bounds of human decency and propriety.

The African-American collective is TEEMING with ethically insane individuals. Individuals who retain their intellectual capacity but harbor strange and depraved ideas that are far outside the bounds of decency and propriety.

We've seen examples of ethical insanity with the strange and depraved ideas voiced by a number of African-Americans regarding the Dunbar Village gang rape case. http://www.whataboutourdaughters.com/2009/08/waod-reader-responds-to-vanessa-lee-teacher-of-the-year-not/

We've seen examples of ethical insanity with the strange and depraved priorities of many of our (mis)leaders. http://www.whataboutourdaughters.com/2008/03/open-letter-regarding-naacp-sharpton-and-dunbar-village-atrocity/ [Please note that Maude Ford Lee, the President of the West Palm Beach Branch of the NAACP, is the mother of the ethically insane Vanessa Lee who is quoted in the first What About Our Daughters post linked above. It's obvious that this ethically insane "apple" didn't fall far from the tree.]

I was reminded of the issue of ethical insanity during our recent blog discussion about the emerging trend of historically Black colleges and universities becoming epicenters of HIV/AIDS infections. I was quite impressed by the commenters. They didn't do what African-American women typically do when discussing the skyrocketing numbers of HIV/AIDS infections among Black women. I was delighted to see that commenters didn't fixate on becoming what some gay Black male activists have called "down low detectives." [All of which is not to deny the need for concern about unwittingly dating down low men. But prudent concern isn't the same thing as an irrational fixation.]

My Sisters, Eliminate The KNOWN Risks Before Fixating On Speculative Risks

I've always wondered why so many African-American women fixate on becoming what some gay Black male activists have called "down low detectives" instead of starting by eliminating KNOWN, easily-identified risks from their sexual lives such as Black male criminals, drug users and playboys.

Yes, down low Black men ARE a large part of the problem as pertains to African-American women becoming infected with HIV/AIDS. But so are the straight Black male jailbirds, dope fiends and playas! It amazes me to see how fixated so many African-American women are on scoping out hidden down low signs instead of getting rid of the known, easily-identifiable risks such as the jailbirds, dope fiends and playas. I wouldn't call this behavior ethically insane, but it is irrational and self-defeating if the point is simply to reduce one's risk of dating an infected man. There's also a touch of unethical cowardice in only fixating on culturally "approved" targets of condemnation, instead of speaking the entire truth. Instead of also identifying the "sacred cows" of Black male jailbirds, druggies and playboys as sources of HIV/AIDS transmission to African-American women.

However, there are some Black female "down low detectives" who ARE ethically insane:

Ethical Insanity Outbreak At D.C.'s Greater Mount Calvary Holy Church

Here's part of the story published by the Washington Blade dated February 1, 2008 (you really need to read it in its entirety---it's that . . . special---my comments are in blue):

"One of Washington’s largest black Pentecostal churches was rocked by a female member of its choir who sent separate e-mail messages to the pastor in December and January outing more than 100 church members as gay, mostly male choir members.

The outings added to the inner turmoil experienced by a large number of gays who attend services at the 7,000-member Greater Mount Calvary Holy Church, located on Rhode Island Ave., N.E., according to a gay former member who provided copies of the e-mails to the Blade.

“'I will be leaving the choir at the top of the year because 80 percent of the tenors are homosexuals and act more like a female in choir rehearsal than I do,' the church choir member said in one of her e-mails to Bishop Alfred Owens Jr., the church pastor. [Khadija speaking: So . . . let's see. This woman is writing the pastor complaining about allegedly gay men in the church choir that she also accuses of acting in a stereotypical effeminate manner. And she feels compelled to "notify" the pastor about this . . . because these multitudes of allegedly effeminate, gay men in his choir have somehow escaped his notice. Even though he watches these men sing each and every Sunday. Hmmm . . .]

The e-mail, sent in December, identifies about 45 fellow church members as gay. She sent a second e-mail to Owens on Jan. 2 identifying another 62 church members as gay. [Khadija: So, somehow the pastor (who we'll later see is an anti-gay bigot) supposedly never noticed over 100 allegedly effeminate, gay men singing in his choir each Sunday. That's . . . interesting.]

'The following people I am asking you to monitor very closely and my prayer is that you will sit them down from their ministries,' she told Owens in the December e-mail. 'Because they are ushering in the presence of sin, lies, a spirit of homosexuality and sexual spirits.' [Khadija: Whatever. Gee, I wonder what "spirit" this "blessed and highly favored" woman is ushering in?]

She sent a copy of her e-mails to a Yahoo list group that goes to more than 300 church members, the gay former church member said. [Khadija: Oh, my God . . . that's incredibly vicious. She already called herself "telling on" these men to the pastor. What possible, purportedly "good faith" reason could she have for doing this? As my best friend from New Orleans says in the gentle drawl that she pulls out for emphasis---Ahhh . . . naaawwww. This is some petty, evil, and downright Satanic mess. What sounds most likely is something along the lines that after spending several years in the choir, "Sister Bertha" was not chosen to do a solo and then she got mad. And then she decided to lash out. Whatever her true, petty gripe was, she's certainly ethically insane.]

. . Owens became the subject of media attention in April 2006 when he used the word 'fag' in a sermon on Palm Sunday. 'It takes real men to confess Jesus as Lord and Savior,' Owens said in the sermon, which was recorded by the church. 'I’m not talking about no faggot or no sissy,' he said. 'Let the real men come down here and take a bow — all the real men. I’m talking about straight men … praise God that you’re straight.'

The church’s web site includes a listing of twice-monthly sessions of a ministry called 'Breaking the Chains of Homosexuality,' which it says helps gays change their sexual orientation through counseling and prayer. [Khadija: All right, now. This church has been quite up-front in telling gays and lesbians that they are NOT welcome there; and that this place is NOT a church home for them. So why are they going there; and going so far as to participate in the choirs? In many ways this reminds me of how slave-minded African-Americans persist in shopping with Koreans and Arab shopkeepers who have nothing but hatred and contempt for them.

But it also raises the ethical question of what good-faith reason could gays and lesbians possibly have for going to this particular church? This church has already let them know that they are not welcome. So, why are they infiltrating places of worship where they've been told that they are not welcome? To my way of thinking, that's somewhat unethical. A house of worship is not intended to function like a government building. It's a place of private fellowship among presumably like-minded believers. There's NO obligation whatsoever for any house of worship to make any particular person or any particular category of persons feel welcome there.

It would be similar to me (as a progressive Muslim) infiltrating a Taliban-type mosque that's up-front about the fact that they preach reactionary madness. What legitimate purpose would I have for running up in there when I know they don't want progressive Muslims in THEIR mosque? And it is their mosque since it was founded, and is being run, according to their reactionary doctrine. That's their spiritual "home." How is it legitimate for me to either infiltrate or gate-crash their spiritual home when they've made it clear that they don't want me in there?]

. . . The gay former church member who sent the outing e-mails to the Blade also sent a copy of a separate e-mail from an outraged gay church member who was among those named in the first two e-mails as gay. 'I do not believe that someone would [have] the nerve to put my name to a list of known gays,' he wrote in an e-mail sent to Owens and members of the church Yahoo group. 'This has gone too far, I am not going down by myself.' He went on to name other gays, including some in high-level church positions. [Khadija: WOW! . . . just wow. . . Yet another example of ethical insanity.]

'It is so bad that in the last e-mail we are turning on each other,' the gay former church member, who sent copies of the e-mails to the Blade, said. 'Although I wanted to remain anonymous, someone has to do something.'" [Khadija: Yes, that was unfortunate. It's an important reminder that people can be victims AND victimizers at the same time. We'll get back to this point later.] http://www.washblade.com/2008/2-1/news/localnews/11956.cfm

Several Black gay and lesbian blogs discussed this incident at the time. Pam's House Blend (although her audience seems to be composed of mostly White lesbians and gays. http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do%3fdiaryId=4351 and Living Out Loud with Darian at http://loldarian.blogspot.com/2008/01/bishop-alfred-owens-some-people-never.html) discussed this incident at the time. You may find it interesting to read the discussions there.

There Are Many Situations Where People Are Victims AND Villains At The Same Time

Real life is filled with nuances and shades of gray. There are many situations where oppressed people are also victimizing and endangering others. A person can be a victim and a villain at the same time. I've talked about this before in the context of battered women:

"If You Choose to Help a Victim of Domestic Violence, Offer Help From A SAFE DISTANCE.

This is the part where I'm sure to offend many, if not most, survivors of domestic violence. I must admit that I'm not automatically as empathetic as I used to be about this issue. I've had too much work-related exposure to domestic violence victims. Both as a former prosecutor and as a defense attorney.

Here's the part that women's advocates won't tell you: Many women who are victims of domestic violence will ultimately, and eagerly, go back to their abusers. If you allowed yourself to get heavily involved in "rescuing" such a woman, she AND her abuser will paint you as somebody who just wanted to break them up (after she returns to him). This means that the male abuser might want to come after YOU after they are lovey-dovey again!

Many women who are victims of domestic violence will also destroy any sanctuary that you offer them. They will bring predators into the previously-safe environment. After she reconciles with her batterer, she will start having him come visit her in the new apartment that you provided for her. She will be resentful if you won't allow him to move into the new apartment. This scenario has happened to several other landlords I know. Good Samaritan, Beware!"

Several readers described their own observations of this:

One reader said, "As a child, I witnessed my mother turn on people who tried to intervene when she was getting beat on. As an adult, I was told by my brothers that once she regained custody of them, that she would turn on them whenever they tried to stop the fighting between her and her husband. They eventually just learned to tune it out, by going into their bedrooms and turning on some music."

Another reader commented, "My niece had a friend who lived next door to us several years ago. The friend lived with her mother, and her mother’’s boyfriend. One summer day we had a cook out in the back yard when we heard screaming and yelling. The woman was being beaten by her boyfriend, and actually began screaming for my 8-year-old niece to help her!

She was actually screaming my niece’s name and telling her to come and help her!! My niece wanted to go upstairs, but my mother stopped her. Instead we called the cops. By the time the cops got there, it was over. We directed the cops to the right door, and when they knocked, she opened the door and told them that he had left. The cops told her they had to come in and talk to her, but I guess the boyfriend hid while she talked to them.

Do you know this woman didn’t speak to us for about a month after this incident! Apparently, she didn’t want the cops called. She just wanted someone to come and help her. As far as I was concerned, the cops were help! The boyfriend never spoke to us again, which was fine by me. My niece was very confused by the whole thing, and I was actually mad myself, so her not speaking worked for me.

I couldn't help but wonder what would have happened if my niece had been visiting her daughter or if she had been in the back yard by herself. She probably would have gone up there to try to help. And what about my niece's friend? God only knows what she was seeing living there. After that incident I forbade my niece from ever going to their house again. In these situations, you are not only up against the abuser, you are also up against the abused. How many times have the cops put cuffs on an abuser only to have the victim scream to leave him alone. I can't save a woman from herself." http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/02/you-dont-need-anybodys-permission-to.html

There are many times when we have to protect ourselves from people who are being victimized by others. This down low phenomenon is one of those situations. Yes, the widespread and virulent anti-gay bigotry within African-American culture is what causes so many gay and bisexual Black men to hide their true orientation. However, this oppression does NOT give anybody license to use women (without their knowledge or consent) as cover stories. It's one thing to hide without involuntarily involving other people in your deception. It's something else to deceive women and endanger their lives because you want to hide. This sort of behavior is ethically insane.

Many Gay Black Male Activists Are SOLELY Focused On Avoiding Accountability For Their Group's Part In The Spread of HIV/AIDS---They DON'T Care About Public Health Or Safety

It's been disturbing to see that many gay Black male activists don't seem to comprehend the ethical insanity of down low gay men deceiving women, using them as involuntary cover stories, and thereby endangering these women's lives without their knowledge. Let's get real: Most women across the board are not going to insist upon their husbands wearing condoms. Period. The only thing many gay Black male activists are focused on is ducking and dodging having any level of accountability for this plague being assigned to gay/bisexual Black men.

I've read all sorts of utterly irresponsible statements from gay Black male commenters and activists. I'll just mention one such activist named Keith Boykin. I read his book Beyond The Down Low: Sex, Lies, and Denial in Black America. His book is basically several hundred pages of "Don't blame us gay/bisexual Black men for being involved in spreading this plague." Read the following essay to get the flavor of the book. http://www.keithboykin.com/arch/2005/02/03/10_things_you_s

No matter what the issue (violent crime, drug addiction, etc.), irresponsible African-American "thinkers" consistently argue that focusing on elimating our own destructive behavior is a distraction from the so-called REAL issue. And somehow the so-called "real" issue is always something that is outside of our control. This posture of ducking and dodging any responsibility for the negative results caused by negative behaviors is a tradition. It's a tradition with African-American males, and the African-American collective in general. Protecting an image is more important than the African-American lives that are lost. This posture is ethically insane.

The "Change" That NEVER Came---Republished Article From STRATFOR

2009-08-29T18:37:00.007-05:00

Strategic Forecasting, Inc., more commonly known as Stratfor, is a private intelligence agency founded in 1996 in Austin, Texas. Barron's once referred to it as "The Shadow CIA". George Friedman is the founder, chief intelligence officer, and CEO of the company. The following article is from http://www.stratfor.com/:

"Obama's Foreign Policy: The End of the Beginning
August 24, 2009

By George Friedman

Related Link
Special Series: Obama’s Foreign Policy Landscape

As August draws to a close, so does the first phase of the Obama presidency. The first months of any U.S. presidency are spent filling key positions and learning the levers of foreign and national security policy. There are also the first rounds of visits with foreign leaders and the first tentative forays into foreign policy. The first summer sees the leaders of the Northern Hemisphere take their annual vacations, and barring a crisis or war, little happens in the foreign policy arena. Then September comes and the world gets back in motion, and the first phase of the president’s foreign policy ends. The president is no longer thinking about what sort of foreign policy he will have; he now has a foreign policy that he is carrying out.

We therefore are at a good point to stop and consider not what U.S. President Barack Obama will do in the realm of foreign policy, but what he has done and is doing. As we have mentioned before, the single most remarkable thing about Obama’s foreign policy is how consistent it is with the policies of former President George W. Bush. This is not surprising. Presidents operate in the world of constraints; their options are limited. Still, it is worth pausing to note how little Obama has deviated from the Bush foreign policy.

During the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign, particularly in its early stages, Obama ran against the Iraq war. The centerpiece of his early position was that the war was a mistake, and that he would end it. Obama argued that Bush’s policies — and more important, his style — alienated U.S. allies. He charged Bush with pursuing a unilateral foreign policy, alienating allies by failing to act in concert with them. In doing so, he maintained that the war in Iraq destroyed the international coalition the United States needs to execute any war successfully. Obama further argued that Iraq was a distraction and that the major effort should be in Afghanistan. He added that the United States would need its NATO allies’ support in Afghanistan. He said an Obama administration would reach out to the Europeans, rebuild U.S. ties there and win greater support from them.

Though around 40 countries cooperated with the United States in Iraq, albeit many with only symbolic contributions, the major continental European powers — particularly France and Germany — refused to participate. When Obama spoke of alienating allies, he clearly meant these two countries, as well as smaller European powers that had belonged to the U.S. Cold War coalition but were unwilling to participate in Iraq and were now actively hostile to U.S. policy.

A European Rebuff

Early in his administration, Obama made two strategic decisions. First, instead of ordering an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, he adopted the Bush administration’s policy of a staged withdrawal keyed to political stabilization and the development of Iraqi security forces. While he tweaked the timeline on the withdrawal, the basic strategy remained intact. Indeed, he retained Bush’s defense secretary, Robert Gates, to oversee the withdrawal.

Second, he increased the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. The Bush administration had committed itself to Afghanistan from 9/11 onward. But it had remained in a defensive posture in the belief that given the forces available, enemy capabilities and the historic record, that was the best that could be done, especially as the Pentagon was almost immediately reoriented and refocused on the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq. Toward the end, the Bush administration began exploring — under the influence of Gen. David Petraeus, who designed the strategy in Iraq — the possibility of some sort of political accommodation in Afghanistan.

Obama has shifted his strategy in Afghanistan to this extent: He has moved from a purely defensive posture to a mixed posture of selective offense and defense, and has placed more forces into Afghanistan (although the United States still has nowhere near the number of troops the Soviets had when they lost their Afghan war). Therefore, the core structure of Obama’s policy remains the same as Bush’s except for the introduction of limited offensives. In a major shift since Obama took office, the Pakistanis have taken a more aggressive stance (or at least want to appear more aggressive) toward the Taliban and al Qaeda, at least within their own borders. But even so, Obama’s basic strategy remains the same as Bush’s: hold in Afghanistan until the political situation evolves to the point that a political settlement is possible.

Most interesting is how little success Obama has had with the French and the Germans. Bush had given up asking for assistance in Afghanistan, but Obama tried again. He received the same answer Bush did: no. Except for some minor, short-term assistance, the French and Germans were unwilling to commit forces to Obama’s major foreign policy effort, something that stands out.

Given the degree to which the Europeans disliked Bush and were eager to have a president who would revert the U.S.-European relationship to what it once was (at least in their view), one would have thought the French and Germans would be eager to make some substantial gesture rewarding the United States for selecting a pro-European president. Certainly, it was in their interest to strengthen Obama. That they proved unwilling to make that gesture suggests that the French and German relationship with the United States is much less important to Paris and Berlin than it would appear. Obama, a pro-European president, was emphasizing a war France and Germany approved of over a war they disapproved of and asked for their help, but virtually none was forthcoming.

The Russian Non-Reset

Obama’s desire to reset European relations was matched by his desire to reset U.S.-Russian relations. Ever since the Orange Revolution in the Ukraine in late 2004 and early 2005, U.S.-Russian relations had deteriorated dramatically, with Moscow charging Washington with interfering in the internal affairs of former Soviet republics with the aim of weakening Russia. This culminated in the Russo-Georgian war last August. The Obama administration has since suggested a “reset” in relations, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton actually carrying a box labeled “reset button” to her spring meeting with the Russians.

The problem, of course, was that the last thing the Russians wanted was to reset relations with the United States. They did not want to go back to the period after the Orange Revolution, nor did they want to go back to the period between the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Orange Revolution. The Obama administration’s call for a reset showed the distance between the Russians and the Americans: The Russians regard the latter period as an economic and geopolitical disaster, while the Americans regard it as quite satisfactory. Both views are completely understandable.

The Obama administration was signaling that it intends to continue the Bush administration’s Russia policy. That policy was that Russia had no legitimate right to claim priority in the former Soviet Union, and that the United States had the right to develop bilateral relations with any country and expand NATO as it wished. But the Bush administration saw the Russian leadership as unwilling to follow the basic architecture of relations that had developed after 1991, and as unreasonably redefining what the Americans thought of as a stable and desirable relationship.

The Russian response was that an entirely new relationship was needed between the two countries, or the Russians would pursue an independent foreign policy matching U.S. hostility with Russian hostility. Highlighting the continuity in U.S.-Russian relations, plans for the prospective ballistic missile defense installation in Poland, a symbol of antagonistic U.S.-Russian relations, remain unchanged.

The underlying problem is that the Cold War generation of U.S. Russian experts has been supplanted by the post-Cold War generation, now grown to maturity and authority. If the Cold warriors were forged in the 1960s, the post-Cold warriors are forever caught in the 1990s. They believed that the 1990s represented a stable platform from which to reform Russia, and that the grumbling of Russians plunged into poverty and international irrelevancy at that time is simply part of the post-Cold War order.

They believe that without economic power, Russia cannot hope to be an important player on the international stage. That Russia has never been an economic power even at the height of its influence but has frequently been a military power doesn’t register. Therefore, they are constantly expecting Russia to revert to its 1990s patterns, and believe that if Moscow doesn’t, it will collapse — which explains U.S. Vice President Joe Biden’s interview in The Wall Street Journal where he discussed Russia’s decline in terms of its economic and demographic challenges. Obama’s key advisers come from the Clinton administration, and their view of Russia — like that of the Bush administration — was forged in the 1990s.

Foreign Policy Continuity Elsewhere

When we look at U.S.-China policy, we see very similar patterns with the Bush administration. The United States under Obama has the same interest in maintaining economic ties and avoiding political complications as the Bush administration did. Indeed, Hillary Clinton explicitly refused to involve herself in human rights issues during her visit to China. Campaign talk of engaging China on human rights issues is gone. Given the interests of both countries, this makes sense, but it is also noteworthy given the ample opportunity to speak to China on this front (and fulfill campaign promises) that has arisen since Obama took office (such as the Uighur riots).

Of great interest, of course, were the three great openings of the early Obama administration, to Cuba, to Iran, and to the Islamic world in general through his Cairo speech. The Cubans and Iranians rebuffed his opening, whereas the net result of the speech to the Islamic world remains unclear. With Iran we see the most important continuity. Obama continues to demand an end to Tehran’s nuclear program, and has promised further sanctions unless Iran agrees to enter into serious talks by late September.

On Israel, the United States has merely shifted the atmospherics. Both the Bush and Obama administrations demanded that the Israelis halt settlements, as have many other administrations. The Israelis have usually responded by agreeing to something small while ignoring the larger issue. The Obama administration seemed ready to make a major issue of this, but instead continued to maintain security collaboration with the Israelis on Iran and Lebanon (and we assume intelligence collaboration). Like the Bush administration, the Obama administration has not allowed the settlements to get in the way of fundamental strategic interests.

This is not a criticism of Obama. Presidents — all presidents — run on a platform that will win. If they are good presidents, they will leave behind these promises to govern as they must. This is what Obama has done. He ran for president as the antithesis of Bush. He has conducted his foreign policy as if he were Bush. This is because Bush’s foreign policy was shaped by necessity, and Obama’s foreign policy is shaped by the same necessity. Presidents who believe they can govern independent of reality are failures. Obama doesn’t intend to fail.

Tell STRATFOR What You Think
For Publication in Letters to STRATFOR Not For Publication
This report may be forwarded or republished on your website with attribution to http://www.stratfor.com/"

What Your Daughter Has To Look Forward To If She Attends A Historically Black College, Or Only Dates Black Men While At A White College

2009-08-26T06:40:00.022-05:00

Please Join Me For A Round Of Geostrategy Nerd: "For The Love Of God, DON'T Send Your Daughters To Historically Black Colleges!"

2009-08-24T22:52:00.004-05:00

I made the following comment while responding to a reader during a recent blog post:

"Karen,

You said, "I hope that I am wrong, but I do not think very many will make it out....Based on your experienced observations, many are already lost."

{Khadija dipping into Ebonics} They gone. They LONG gone.

You said, "As many states have their prison data online, I did a random checks of the race of prisoners listed in any particular prison. 7 to 8 out of 10 were AA (male or female, it did not matter) . . . . AA women that continue to associate with this fringe and all its various permutations are lost."

Exactly. And the disturbing thing is that this "element" and it's "fringe" are OBVIOUS hazards to BW's survival. There are some other, more subtle DEATHTRAPS that I'm doing research on right now. I'll explain in detail during the post I plan to have up for the beginning of September, but I'll say the basic warning here and now:

For the love of God, DON'T send your daughters to historically Black colleges and universities! Especially Howard University in Washington, DC. These HBCUs are emerging DEATHTRAPS! As in literal deathtraps. Some of you will probably guess what specific phenomenon is causing me to say this, but I'll leave all of that for September."

I was going to leave this topic until I had finished researching and writing the post by the first week in September, but I've changed my mind.

It just occurred to me that this is an excellent opportunity for audience members to do the mental exercise of playing "geostrategy nerd" regarding something that is of the utmost importance: our children's safety. Prior to the most recent Geostrategy Nerd post, I had been talking "at" you about what I see as emerging trends.

Let's do something different this time. This time, I'm inviting you to do the research WITH me about an issue. Let's reason together, and work through the details of my concerns TOGETHER, at the same time. [I'll add links to relevant articles, etc. as the conversation progresses. On second thought, I'll leave those citations in the comments section---it's worth the time to read through this conversation.]

But, first, you have to guess what my specific concern is about Black female students attending HBCUs in this modern era! *Smile*

***To anyone that I've already disclosed my specific concern to, please don't submit a comment identifying or discussing my concern unless and until another audience member figures it out. I want folks to have the experience for themselves of working through these sorts of issues.***

So far, people have mentioned the purely social dynamics that are problematic at historically Black colleges and universities. The emotional difficulties caused by these negative social dynamics are serious, but they're not what's most dangerous about these campuses for young African-American women.

I submit to you that these same, negative social dynamics have literally life-threatening repercussions. Repercussions that have already begun to emerge at several historically Black colleges. These repercussions were in the news about 5 years ago; however I've never heard anyone "connect the dots" or sound the alarm about this particular topic in a LOUD voice.

Here are 3 (somewhat) interlocking hints:

1-In what way can we say that Washington, D.C. (where Howard University is located) has replaced San Francisco?

2-Historically Black colleges; and

3-The gender imbalances at HBCUs. According to Understanding Gender at Public Historically Black Colleges and Universities: A Special Report of the Thurgood Marshall Scholarship Fund, Inc., "Females are a majority (63%) of the total number of students enrolled at the 45 public Historically Black Colleges and Universities. . . " pg. 10. http://www.thurgoodmarshallfund.org/downloads/2006_gender_study.pdf

What's the emerging, life-threatening problem at these schools that nobody's really talking about? A problem that will only get worse, using our previous collective behavior as a roadmap?

The Mass "Gaslighting" Of African-American Women

2009-08-24T00:11:00.011-05:00

The Art Of Black-Owned Business, Part 4: Give Customers What They Actually Want, NOT What They Need

2009-08-23T17:51:00.023-05:00

During Part 1 of this series, I had the following exchange with a reader (my comments are in blue):

"Imam Isa Mateen said...

Wow! I run an Islamic Elementary/high School. Many Black Muslims send their kids to the local Arab school where their kids are suspended for the least infraction and the curriculum is inferior. When their kids get kicked out of the Arab school, the parents run to us and want to complain about our tuition - even though it's lower than the inferior Arab school.! We teach African History. Parents will complain about that saying we're "racist." But hey have no problem with their child learning Arab History, American History and World History(as long as Africa is not included in the world!) It is mind boggling! Is their hope for our people?

Imam Isa,

You said, [quoting his comment]. Well, here are my thoughts about that:

(1) The first part of what you're describing relates to the rule of "Do not believe everything the customer tells you." You see, AAs like YOU and I want "Islamic schools." But what the masses of Sunni Muslim AAs actually want is Arabian schools. In terms of the NOI, I'm not quite sure whether what their members actually want are "Islamic schools" or "Master Fard Muhammad Ideology schools."

In order to thrive as Black business owners, we have to respond based upon what the consumers ACTUALLY want, and NOT based upon what they say they want. We have to meet the consumers' wants and not necessarily their needs. I'm going to talk about this during Part 2 of this series.

AA consumers lie and claim that they want more Black-owned businesses. But that's NOT what they actually want. MOST consumers DON'T want to be involved with a visibly Black-owned business. Especially AA consumers. We have to work around that aversion.

(2) The second part of what you're describing relates to the fact that there's no "us" anymore. Not in the sense that you're using that term. There are AAs like you, me, and the other handful of survivors and thrivers. And then there are the masses of AAs who are "THEY" and "THEM." "They" and "them" are NOT part of "US." There's an ever-widening distinction between the 2 categories of AAs."

Author George Subira perfectly summed it up in his book Black Folks' Guide to Making Big Money in America when he said:

"People want what they want. You may come along as a good guy and try to give people what you think they need, maybe even what they think they need, but they will still want what they want. Eventually it will hit you that people really don't deal with their needs. They don't buy what they need or do what they need to do. People deal with their wants, period. They buy what they want and do what they want. They may eventually deal with their needs but only if there is any money, time or energy leftover. [Khadija speaking: Ridiculous, but true.]

. . . If you play social worker trying to supply a need instead of a businessman supplying want, you will go broke."

Black Folks' Guide to Making Big Money in America, pg. 161 (emphasis added). The easy to remember rule for African-Americans is that they buy what they want, and beg for what they need.

Keep in mind that most people continue to focus on wants even when they are looking to have a need met! For example, most people need some form of personal transportation. However, people buy the form of transportation that they want (SUVs, "luxury" autos, etc.) and not simply the transportation that they need (fuel efficient cars that are reasonably reliable). This leads to the next point:

Successful Businesses Also Provide An Element of Escapism With Their Products

Mr. Subira said:

"The product that you sell must have some escape element connected to it. By escape I mean an item or situation or service that allows the buyer to forget or lose consciousness of their poverty, powerlessness, ignorance, pain, family problems, job problems, or other of life's hassles. [Khadija speaking: Multiply this angle by a factor of 1,000 when dealing with African-American consumers.]

People need to deal with their problems and try to solve them. But people generally want to escape them altogether.

One of the reasons, for example, why people are so concerned with the extensive lighting, sound system, and non-stop music of discos is because the more 'atmosphere' and fantasy associated with the place, the closer it comes to being in 'another world.' What better 'escape value' can you have than being in 'another world?'

Discos, skating rinks, bars, movies, churches, amusement parks, music concerts, stage shows, sporting events, etc. are places of escape. Once the paying customer enters the place, there is a loss of attention to almost any problem short of sharp, physical pain. [Khadija speaking: Excuse me for laughing at seeing this point laid bare. It is amusing.]

Beauty parlors, massage parlors, health spas, tennis courts, bowling alleys, and pinball games [Khadija: this book was written in 1980. Let's add computer use and video games to this list] are activities or services furnishing a degree of mental and physical escape from the daily routine and pressures. Records, books, liquor, televisions, tape players and fancy decorated vans are items that are purchased to seek a form of escape by shutting out the events of the real world and focusing on the atmosphere that the item creates or generates."

Black Folks' Guide to Making Big Money in America, pg. 163 (emphasis added).

Let's Use The Islamic School Mentioned Earlier As A Case Study

Now that we've reviewed these reality check aspects of successful businesses, let's reconsider the situation that Imam Isa Mateen described in his comment.

Since we now know that we can't take customers' statements at face value, we need to consider what it is that the customer is actually looking to get from the products they choose. These things are usually left unspoken.

If you were unwise enough openly quiz customers about what they actually want, they would tell lies about what they really want. Furthermore, it's usually unwise to directly offer customers their true wants. If you did try to directly offer them what they really want, most of them would be offended and humiliated. You have to be subtle when supplying customers' true wants. Typically, this means chattering about their stated wants while you're really meeting their true wants.

Let's get back to the Islamic school example. The African-American Sunni ["Orthodox"] Muslim parents that were mentioned earlier want to believe that they're seeking to meet their children's needs. What are some of the needs that, on the surface, these African-American, slave-mentality, Muslim parents want to meet? If anyone asked them, they would probably list the following things:

1-Excellent education
2-That incorporates Muslim religious instruction
3-In a safe environment
4-In a wholesome environment free of the corrupting influences found in the public schools.

Okay. . . so far, so good with the Imam's Islamic school---let's assume that his school is providing all of the above.

However, there's already an open split between what he's providing and the parents' (unspoken) wants: He's giving African-American children what he (and I) believe they actually NEED by including African history in his curriculum. The problem is that not only do most African-American parents feel that their children don't "need" to know anything about African/Black anything, but they don't WANT their children to be taught about African/Black anything!

Most African-American/Black parents aren't going to come out and say that they don't want their children taught anything about African or African-American history. It would be embarassing for them to admit that. Instead, they will accuse anyone who teaches African/African-American history of "teaching racism." This is the "open" split between what the Imam's school is offering Black parents and their TRUE wants.

What's the "hidden" split between what's being provided and these slave-parents' true wants?

The "hidden" split is that the Imam's school is not providing these African-American Sunni ("Orthodox") Muslim parents or their children with any sort of "escape" from Blackness. Many African-American Sunni Muslims want to feel like they and their children are "transcending" or "passing out of" their previous state of Blackness.

This unspoken need to feel that they and their children are "escaping" and "transcending" Blackness is actually the MOST important aspect of any "Islamic" school for these colored, slave-mentality Sunni Muslim parents! This is why these parents will pay more to get less (an inferior education under inferior circumstances for their children)---as long as their children can be up under Arabs or Pakistanis.

For an example of this mentality, read the the following post, where (among other things) the blog author says,

"What I am talking about is individuals intentionally choosing to move themselves and their offspring away from being black in order to protect themselves (and their offspring) from racism and at the same time afford themselves more opportunities. Especially in the Muslim world where this is often magnified." http://tariqnelson.com/2006/11/07/the-new-passing/

I would imagine that any Islamic school offering African history would face difficulties in the context of an African-American Sunni ("Orthodox") Muslim collective where people are "intentionally choosing to move themselves and their offspring away from being black . . ."

In order to be successful, a Black-owned business must be careful to supply what the customers actually want (with at least a little escapism included), not what they say they want. A virtuous Black business owner will seek creative ways to also slip in some of what the customer actually needs. But not at the expense of making the sale.

The Art Of Black-Owned Business, Part 3: Are You Money-Minded Or Ego-Driven At Work?

2009-08-22T12:04:00.023-05:00

Let's discuss in greater detail the topic raised by Part 2 of this series. So far, I've mostly focused on the irrational things going on in the minds of many consumers (particularly African-American consumers). Let's turn to some of the irrational things going on in the minds of many African-American business owners.

Decades before the Rich Dad/Poor Dad books, there were several excellent books that discussed similar ideas within an African-American context. One of these books was Black Folks' Guide To Business Success by George Subira. He discussed the fact that African-Americans often go into business for reasons other than seeking economic prosperity. He said:

"Reason #1: To Be the Boss

Black people have historically been slaves, laborers and workers. There has always been a White overseer, bossman, foreman or supervisor looking over our shoulder to see if we were doing the job they wanted, the way they wanted us to do it. It's not surprising that a certain portion of this working class, both male and female, become fed up with this routine and start their own business---to be free from the hassle of a "boss." There is nothing inherently wrong with this feeling.

But too often this new businessperson has a life-long chip on their shoulder and they now substitute their own tyrant-like ways in place of the supervisor they have just left. In other words, these business people need to show everybody that enters their place of business that they are the boss and they are in control.

[Khadija speaking: We don't just do this as business owners. Too many of us do this whenever we become supervisors and managers on our jobs. In fact, the vast majority of African-Americans go buck wild across the board whenever we get even a smidgen of authority. I discussed this "Head Negro In Charge syndrome" in this post http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2008/10/art-of-majesty-part-1-avoid-head-negro.html]

This seriously affects their ability to be friendly, courteous and serve the people. Instead, customers pick up a kind of hostility, disagreeableness or apathy almost from the moment they enter the establishment. Many of these types of businesspeople could not possibly view themselves as servants of the public or as having a responsibility to the public. As a matter of fact, the attitude of a "Me Boss Man" type of owner is almost the opposite of a money-minded business owner. For example:

Money-Minded Owner [MMO]: Greets customers with a smile whether they feel good or not.

Boss Man Owner [BMO]: May or may not greet customer depending on how they feel.

MMO: I must prove to the people that we are the best, the friendliest, cleanest, the cheapest, etc.

BMO: I ain't got to prove a da** thing to anybody. Those days are over. [Khadija: {chuckling}]

MMO: The customer is always right. [Khadija speaking: Hmmm. . . I wouldn't say that. I would say that "We are here to serve the customer's legitimate needs and wishes to the very best of our ability." Unfortunately, Black-owned businesses have to be extremely cautious with Black customers. African-American customers will often come to Black businesses with disruptive behavior, violent behavior, and scams that they don't dare approach non-Black businesses with. Many African-American consumers will go out of their way to try to exploit and cheat a Black-owned business. Also, African-Americans often take kindness for weakness (and an invitation to prey on the kind person) when the kindness comes from another African-American.]

BMO: If you don't like it, you can leave now and you don't have to come back in here anymore.

MMO: I must set an example for my employees and not ask them to do anything I can't do.

BMO: If they don't do like I tell 'em I'll fire 'em; simple as dat."

Black Folks' Guide To Business Success, pgs. 74-75.

Although we're specifically discussing our mental preparation to build and maintain our businesses, this issue actually applies across the board with most African-Americans.

One of the many pathologies of conquered, subjugated people is their inability to be gracious when they find themselves in positions of authority. It's time to break that slavery-derived mental habit.

*Audience Note* Please don't submit comments detailing horror-story-experiences with Black-owned businesses, I won't publish those sorts of comments. We've all had those experiences, and that's not what I'm getting at here. We do this across the board. Including while working as employees on our jobs---many of us like to match wits with our job's customers. [I got a lecture the other day from a Black female postal worker who took great pleasure in making sure that I knew that I lacked a proper understanding of the U.S. Postal Service's procedures. {chuckling}]

I'm hoping to encourage some introspection about the mindsets that create those problems.

The Art Of Black-Owned Business, Part 2: Controlling Perceptions

2009-08-21T07:35:00.013-05:00

From Sun Tzu's The Art of War Plus The Art of Small Business:

"Success in business requires one thing.
You must control people's perceptions.

If you are new, you must appear experienced.
If business is slow, you must appear busy.
If you are anxious, you must appear calm.
If you are worried, you must appear enthusiastic.

If competitors have a good idea, take it as your own.
When customers are uncertain, help them decide.
When competitors are good, you must be better.
When competitors are strong, find a different business.
If customer decisions are emotional, play to emotion.
If competitors are weak, make them overconfident.
If competitors win easy sales, make them work for them.
If competitors have partners, steal the partners away.
Go after competitors who don't expect competition.
Avoid competing in ways that competitors expect.

You will find an opportunity that assures profit.
Never pass it by."

Sun Tzu's The Art of War Plus The Art of Small Business, pg. 33.

The First Set of Perceptions You MUST Control Are Your Own

The first set of perceptions that you must control are your own as a Black business owner. Most of this revolves around checking yourself and your true priorities. What is more important to you---massaging your ego OR making the sale while providing excellent products and service?

It takes emotional discipline to have a colorless business and to maintain secrecy about it being Black-owned. This means that you don't get to puff your chest out and brag about how you're a business owner. This often means that you don't get the emotional payoff of visibly looking like The Boss.

But if you're in tune with reality, then you know that life is not fair and that you can't afford to behave the same way as non-Black business owners. That is, if your priority is to make the sale while providing excellence. The reality is that you won't even get the opportunity to provide excellent products and service to potential customers if they know that your business is Black owned.

So . . . what is the real purpose of having your business if you can't access customers because you insist upon "styling and profiling" as The Owner/The Boss? And how long do you expect to have your business if you function in this manner?

Staying in alignment with your priorities affects other decisions. Let's discuss an example from the world of non-fiction, self-publishing authors of how-to books: search engine optimization of book titles.

Search Engine Optimization of Book Titles: Do You Want To Be Elegant OR Do You Want The Maximum Number of Potential Buyers To Find Your Book?

From Aiming At Amazon by Aaron Shepard:

"When you aim at Amazon, it helps to consider your title as two distinct components. Focusing your book and attracting buyers is the job of the main title. The subtitle, on the other hand, has wholly different functions. First and foremost, it must make your book findable.

. . . If you've ever developed a Web site, you've probably heard of SEO---search engine optimization. This stands for planting keywords in your pages so that, when people search for something on Google or another search engine, your site will show up prominently in results. On Amazon, you do nearly the same thing by planting keywords in your subtitle.

Take my book The Business of Writing for Children. The full subtitle of this book is---let me take a deep breath---An Award-Winning Author's Tips on Writing Children's Books and Publishing them, or How to Write, Publish, and Promote a Book for Kids.

Unwieldy? Certainly---and not much of an ad for my writing skills, either! But take a close look at it. Now try to think of what search phrase you would personally use to tind such a book. You'll likely find that, whatever you come up with, all the words of that phrase are contained within that subtitle. Maybe not in the same order, but still there and ready to be found.

What does that mean on Amazon? When anyone searches for such a book, my competitors' books might show up a third of the time, or a half, or even more. But my book will come up almost every time. So, I will have that many more opportunities to sell my book."

Aiming At Amazon, pgs. 30-31 (emphasis added).

I had a serious problem with this when I first read it. It's contrary to my (ego-driven) preference for elegance in all of my business-related communications. But then I checked my priorities. The nonfiction book that I'm writing has a LOT of information in it that will help many consumers. People who have previewed chapters of my book have said, "I wish I had something like this before I did ___________." So I had to ask myself, "What's more important to me? Getting my book into the hands of as many buyers as possible? Or feeling good about having an elegant and witty book title?"

I also considered the fact that, as a consumer, when I chose to buy this particular book, I was focused on getting the information it provided and NOT the extreme tackiness of its subtitle. [The full title is "Aiming at Amazon: The NEW Business of Self Publishing OR A Successful Self Publisher's System for Profiting from Nonfiction Books with Print on Demand and Book Marketing on Amazon.com." {shaking my head} Lord have mercy. All of that is not on the front cover of the book, but it is on the first page after you open the cover.]

In order to succeed as a Black business owner, you must control perceptions. Starting with your own.

Are you willing to think through your own priorities?

Are you willing act in alignment with your TRUE priorities?

Are you willing to take control of your own perceptions of what you're doing?

Are you willing to do what's needed to take control of customers' perceptions of your business?

The Art Of Black-Owned Business, Part 1: Circumvent Customer Resistance By Having A "Colorless" Business

2009-08-20T07:34:00.016-05:00

Please Join Me In A Round Of Geostrategy Nerd: What Comes Next For You and Yours?

2009-08-18T17:18:00.012-05:00

Faith, blog host of Acts of Faith In Love And Life (which is on my sidebar blogroll), is holding it down! She's done yet another excellent post that I believe deserves your attention: http://actsoffaithinloveandlife.blogspot.com/2009/08/waning-political-clout-of-blacks-in.html

I talked about this waning of African-Americans' prospects in this country from a slightly different angle during the Charity Should Begin At Home series of posts: http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2008/09/charity-should-begin-at-home-part-1.html and http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2008/09/charity-should-begin-at-home-part-2.html

The bottom line is that African-Americans have collectively "blown it." Across a wide array of issues. Since African-Americans have already lost a series of essential battles, I believe that it's critical that those of us who survive shift our attention at this point. The masses of African-Americans will form a permanent underclass in this country. We need to stop focusing on the dead and dying. We need to focus on securing our own (and our children's) long-term interests as African-American survivors. I said the following in a comment to Faith's post:

"Faith,

Yes, our dwindling political influence WILL be yet another disaster for the masses of unprepared AAs.

Since we've lost the war to prevent AAs from becoming a permanent underclass in this country, I've been thinking about what comes next for those AAs who do manage to avoid this fate. Specifically, what comes next for the AA women that I've nicknamed "Sojourners."

I think it would be helpful for us all to ponder what strategic needs those few surviving/thriving AAs will have a decade from now. And how we might best position ourselves and our children to meet those needs.

This question is the LAST, remaining viable war that's left AFTER the various wars that AAs have already lost. We lost the war to prevent AAs falling into mass, permanent underclass status in this country. We lost the war to preserve the AA family. As you've noted here, we've lost the war to preserve (much less expand) our political influence in this country. We are losing the war to preserve our mass economic gains over the past few decades.

All of that is a done deal, and I believe we need to turn our attention to focus on the strategic interests of those of us who will survive and thrive.

I've been reading a book by Thomas Bass about the Vietnam War called The Spy Who Loved Us: The Vietnam War and Pham Xuan An's Dangerous Game.

To summarize the book: "Pham Xuan An was a brilliant journalist and an even better spy. A long-time correspondent for Time and friendly with all the legendary reporters covering Vietnam, he was an invaluable source of news and font of wisdom on all things Vietnamese. At the same time, he was a masterful double agent, a North Vietnamese intelligence agent...kept his cover in place until the day he died..."

The North Vietnamese sent Mr. An to the US in preparation for what they called "the war after the war." Meaning, the battle to preserve the victory that they (correctly) believed that they would eventually win over South Vietnam (and the foreign powers such as France and the US that were propping it up).

This meant that they were sending people like Mr. An to the US to study American culture (in order to better understand their future opponents---they sent him in the late 1950s, before the US seriously entered the Vietnam conflict---and at the point when they were still fighting the French!).

Thinking through "the war after the war" meant that they were already planning to have agents infiltrate the various worldwide Vietnamese refugee communities that would be created by their victory (they were thinking about this 20 years before their victory in the 1970s).

Those few AAs who survive and thrive also need to look to our future needs and interests. Peace, blessings and solidarity."

We often spend a lot of time talking about the African-Americans who are not going to make it. I'm NOT talking to (or about) the many African-American losers now. With this post, I'm talking to (and about) my fellow survivors and thrivers.

So far, I've been telling you what I think during the Geostrategy Nerd posts. I'm now inviting you to join me in a round of Geostrategy Nerd, and think through the following questions:

What comes next for you and yours during the next 20 years?

What are you preparing for your children that will give them a solid foundation? [Lord, God, please don't say "a good education." You know that this is now a minimum requirement that's needed to function in this society. So, a good education is a given. And you know that "a good education" is NOT enough by itself to give somebody a sturdy foundation.]

We can't all own businesses that we can pass down to our children or other loved ones. And we know that we CAN'T pass a job down to our loved ones. But we CAN accumulate other kinds of tangible assets. At a minimal level, we can accumulate things like U.S. Savings Bonds.

So, what exactly are you doing that's meant to last, and designed to do something concrete for yourself, and for loved ones who come after you? [This was the point of the recent post asking you the question, "What impact will your actions have on life 17 generations from now?"]

So, what's next? What will African-American survivors, thrivers, and Sojourners need to do next to properly position ourselves for the future?

For the next 5 years? For the next 10 years? And beyond?

Wildest Dreams Checklist: Are You Living For The Weekends, And Dead For The Rest Of The Week?

2009-08-15T13:01:00.025-05:00

Al-Walaa Wal Baraa, Part 3: Do You Have Any Loyalty To Yourself?

2009-08-12T17:01:00.029-05:00

The other day, I was scrutinizing the Technorati statistics for my blog post tags. I was specifically looking to see what topics my posts were weighted toward. I have my own subjective impression of that, but I've been looking for objective metrics to analyze the blog's content.

Anyhoo, I was pleased to see that my subjective assessment was more or less correct: The blog tags with the largest number of posts were the posts tagged "Wildest Dreams." The single topic with the largest number of blog posts has been about African-American women turning their Wildest Dreams into reality. The topic with the next largest number of blog posts are those tagged "Save Your Own Life." Regarding this topic, the focus has usually been on leaving physically dangerous Black residential areas; leaving dead-end, soul-draining "helping professions;" maintaining one's health through physical fitness; and developing other income streams. These are all steps along the Sojourner's Path.

As much as I prefer to focus on these sorts of things, the reality is that none of this works when you don't have any loyalty to yourself, your values, or your own interests. This lack of loyalty to self is the underlying reason why so many African-American women are so easily pulled off course from turning their dreams into reality.

You can't be loyal to yourself AND loyal that which is anti-you at the same time. When you make room, make a way, and make it comfortable and cozy for people that are anti-you, then you are acting as their ally. If you are in an alliance with somebody who hates you, then you're actually in a state of war against yourself.

Other people fighting against you, plus you helping them fight against you = YOU LOSE.

I. Do You Have Any Loyalty To Yourself?

Most African-American women don't understand the above ideas. This is the underlying reason why so many of us are suffering. We're confused. We don't call the support that we give to people who hate us "being in a state of war against ourselves." We use other terms. We call it being "compassionate," being "loving," "rising above ___________," "being fair," and worst of all, we mislabel giving aid and comfort to people who hate us as "doing the right thing."

NO! Making room, making a way, and making it comfortable and cozy for people who hate you is not the right thing to do. It's the wrong thing! It's wrong to grin and cheese with people who hate you, and make mockery of the things that are most important to you. At minimum, you need to walk away from them while they're in the process of doing this.

The Quran warns about this:

"And indeed He has revealed to
you in the Book that when you hear
Allah’s messages disbelieved in and
mocked at, sit not with them until
they enter into some other discourse,
for then indeed you would be like
them. Surely Allah will gather
together the hypocrites and the disbelievers
all in hell—" Holy Quran, 4: 140.

The Quran also warns the believers about what's really going on with the "haters":

"O ye who believe! Take not into your intimacy
those outside your ranks: They will not fail to corrupt you.
They only desire your ruin: Rank hatred has already
appeared from their mouths:
What their hearts conceal is far worse.
We have made plain to you the Signs, if ye have wisdom." Holy Quran, 3:118.

Do you while away the time with people who hate you?

Do you interact with people who hate you?

Do you remain in the company of people who insult you, and the things that matter most to you?

Do you cheese and grin with people who make mockery of your aspirations?

Most African-American women do the things I've listed above. Some do it because this behavior has become normalized among us. Some know better, and do it anyway out of social pressure. I can hear such women thinking, "If I walk away from everybody who verbally spits on me or my dreams, then I won't have anybody left around me." Well, then you need to work double-time to find some new people to associate with.

I submit to you that part of the reason why you haven't found people who would actually support you and your goals is because you've been "treading water" with folks who don't support you. Two objects can't occupy the same space at the same time. The "haters" around you are taking up space that could be filled with people who are actually compatible with you and your interests.

II. Do You Have Any Boundaries? Is The Space Within YOUR Immediate Presence A "Safe Space"? Are The Spaces That YOU Control Safe Spaces For You, And For Other African-American Women?

Most African-American women don't have any boundaries. We generally don't require the area within our immediate presence to be a "safe space." We also don't make the spaces that we control safe places for ourselves and for other African-American women.

This came up during a recent conversation hosted by Faith (blog host of Acts of Faith In Love and Life, which is on my sidebar blogroll). In this post http://actsoffaithinloveandlife.blogspot.com/2009/08/lessons-african-american-women-can.html), she made mention of a conversation over at another blog. What I found fascinating about the conversation that she made reference to is that a man who has previously voiced his disdain for African-American women was perfectly free and welcome to particpate in this conversation. As if he was a legitimate participant.

It's interesting that a man who has disdain for African-American women, and states that he has very little in common with African-American women hangs out at African-American women's blogs. One may wonder, "Why in the world does he go out of his way to come around us at our blogs, since he has so very little in common with us?"

Well, . . . this man leaves comments at Black women's blogs in order to tell Black women about the disdain he has for us, to insult us, and yet is still a welcome participant at several Black women's blogs.

I don't fault him; he's only doing what he's being allowed to do in an atmosphere that has been made comfy and cozy for him. Furthermore, what he thinks about Black women is not particularly important to me. What is important, and is a point of concern for me, is the fact that he's still welcomed into these conversations at various Black women's blogs as if he's a legitimate participant.

Many African-American women bloggers apparently don't find anything . . . peculiar . . . about allowing somebody to freely pull up a chair in our blog "homes" . . . and insult African-American women. In other words, many of us are okay with our blogs NOT being safe spaces for Black women. I suppose because, you know, we have to be "fair" to people who have already voiced their disdain for us.

How other people operate their spaces is up to them, and is none of my business. [As the Isley Brothers sang, "It's your thing, do what you wanna do. I can't tell you, who to sock it to!" LOL!] That's not my point of concern. What I AM questioning is the mindset that makes this possible in the first place. I AM questioning the widespread mindset that perceives this sort of situation as "normal."

I believe that African-American women who want to survive and thrive must purge their minds of this particular mindset. That's why I'm discussing this concrete example. So that we can all reflect upon what loyalty to self looks like in various contexts.

I said the following over at Faith's blog:

"Faith, Please excuse the extreme length of this comment. I hope to amplify one angle of the point that you made in this post.

I believe AA women need to apply the same analysis that you suggested (of asking "What, if any, value does this individual provide to AA women?") across the board. That includes scrutinizing who it is that we bother to interact with. On any level.

During these online discussions, we're often unfamiliar with the people that we're talking to. Faith, this is what you alluded to when you confronted one BM commenter about his lack of a traceable commenter ID.

As you know, a lot of folks want to comment without any sort of accountability. So, they invent new, closed profiles that they use for leaving certain types of comments. They do this because they don't want anybody following up with them at their own blogs; or making reference to their commenting history (as I'm about to do below).

WARNING: I'm repeating the following for illustration purposes ONLY. Ladies, please DON'T waste your time or breath on this individual. Please DON'T run over to his blog or over to The Black Snob blog to argue or otherwise interact with him. Please ignore him in reference to this.

Keep in mind the following questions that I often wonder as I run across this particular individual commenting over at various AFRICAN-AMERICAN WOMEN'S BLOGS:

1-Why does this man hang out at so many AA women's blogs? Especially considering how very little he says he has in common with AA women?

2-Do the women talking to him know this guy's history in terms of his remarks about AA women?

3-If so, why do they bother interacting with him?

I have a fairly long memory when it comes to nonsense, and I vaguely recalled seeing The Angry Independent commenter being specifically (somewhat humorously) referenced and called out at another BW's blog.

I managed to find his original post that elicited the friendly "call-out" from the other blogger. Here are some pertinent quotes from it: http://mirroronamerica.blogspot.com/2008/05/why-i-hate-being-black-no-899.html

[Audience Note: Since I've linked to it above, there's no need for me to repeat the part of my comment that quotes from this particular blog post, or from his comment over at The Black Snob. One can read his comments over at The Black Snob post that Faith linked to. ]

Again, why are so many of us interacting with this person online? Why is his participation in BW's blog conversations welcomed? Are we paying attention?

[I won't bother to ask whether or not the Internet Ike Turners or Black Unity fascists have ever confronted this particular BM (The Angry Independent) who entitled his blog post "Why I Hate Being Black No. 899". You know, since they're sooo concerned about maintaining Black unity...]

Ladies, other people [especially the Jewish community] have LONG memories in terms of people who insult them. Maybe we need to learn how to have long memories too. Peace, blessings and solidarity.

. . . My issue is that so many BW continue to welcome the participation of men like The Angry Independent in our conversations. As if he's a legitimate participant to discuss issues that are of concern to BW. So, somebody can hate us, but if he prefaces his hatred with "As much as I want to love Black women…………" then it's okay? This is what I find so amazing about some of these conversations.

As to T.O.: He has a right to spend his money and time on whoever he wants. The same way I have the right to totally ignore his problems if and when he has a "Skip Gates/OJ/Wesley Snipes/Michael Vick, etc. Experience." We're ALL free agents! LOL! Thanks for another great post. Peace, blessings and solidarity."

If you're going to successfully walk the Sojourner's Path, you must be loyal to yourself, your values, and your own interests.

Do you have any loyalty to yourself?

Do you while away the time with people who hate you?

Do you interact with people who hate you?

Do you remain in the company of people who insult you, and the things that matter most to you?

Do you cheese and grin with people who make mockery of your aspirations?

Do you have any boundaries?

Is the space within YOUR immediate presence a "safe space"?

Are the spaces that YOU control, safe spaces for you, and for other African-American women?

Table Talk For Activists, Part 7: An Open Letter To Black Women Bloggers, You Tubers, And Event Organizers

2009-08-09T09:02:00.022-05:00

This essay is contained in my new book. I'm delighted to announce that The Sojourner's Passport site has launched! You can visit it at http://www.sojournerspassport.com/.

Everyone, I can't thank you enough for your ongoing encouragement and support; I truly appreciate it. Your support is what made this possible. And here's a special shout-out to my web designers at Educo Web Design. They're nice people to deal with, and they do outstanding work!

Peace and blessings,
Khadija Nassif
______________________________________________

I've already discussed the public handling of Internet Ike Turners in an earlier post. http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/03/table-talk-for-activists-part-4.html Now, in light of subsequent events, I feel the need to mention some behind the scenes precautions that women who have an online presence need to take. Here's a comment that I made in response to one of Faith's recent posts (she's the blog host of Acts of Faith In Love And Life, which is on my sidebar blogroll). I've added links to several news stories:

"Well, first things first: I believe that every woman blog host and YouTuber needs to take security issues seriously. I remember reading a news story a while back about how women blog hosts across the board (and no matter how innocuous their subject matter) are so much more likely to be blog stalked and harassed by male readers. http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu5Xo4H5KvfwA9uVXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEybzQ3Z2gwBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMwRjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkA0Y4NjFfNzg-/SIG=12btiv5t8/EXP=1249915496/**http%3a//abcnews.go.com/GMA/Technology/story%3fid=3104264

Meanwhile, so many women (especially AA women) have been programmed to nervously laugh off male acts of aggression. For example, I'm thinking of a disgruntled BF reader at my blog who was angry when I made a comment about this a while back.

She characterized my comments as paranoid; and defiantly stated that she was not going to "live in fear," etc. In other words, she was not going to take online security issues seriously, nor was she going to take DBR-Black male commenters' online aggression seriously. She took this posture even though the hate comments from DBRBM had driven her off her own blog! Even though she shut down her own blog due to BM harassment, she ANGRILY ran to another BW's blog to badmouth me because I talked about security issues. The mind boggles.

All of this was before a young Black woman named Asia McGowan was murdered by a DBRBM who was spewing hatred toward BW on YouTube. He was spewing hatred in response to her innocuous YouTube videos. http://www.whataboutourdaughters.com/2009/04/youtube-facebook-murder-black-woman-slaughtered-by-crazed-fellow-youtuber-and-facebook-stalker-detroit-police-ignored-warnings-by-youtubers/

[Incidentally, there's a BM website that hails this killer as a hero. I'm not going to name it. I don't give publicity to racist/violent/sexist sites.]

In any event, I strongly urge all women blog hosts to:

(1) Keep track of the trolls' IP addresses and geographical locations;

(2) Maintain a log of print outs of the trolls' comments (whether you publish them on your blog or not---you need to keep a file on these nuts);

(3) And most importantly, be prepared to call your local FBI field office, local law enforcement, and local law enforcement in the troll's jurisdiction THE MOMENT the troll submits a comment that you feel is in any way threatening!

In terms of this latest DBR-killer, it just goes to show that despite the seeming differences between various types of nuts (racists, DBRBM, sexists, religious fanatics, etc.), what they ALL have in common is that they HATE women. Peace, blessings and solidarity."

Ladies, an Internet Ike Turner has already KILLED a young African-American woman. He wasn't the only Internet Ike Turner that's capable of, and eager to commit, violence against women. There are others. Many others.

While browsing through various blogs, I can see that many of the African-American women commenting online haven't really let this sink in. There is still hesitation in their voices about calling law enforcement on those Internet Ike Turners that make threats. It's as if you don't want to acknowledge that many of these nuts would like to physically harm you.

Many of you want to minimize the threat by pretending that it's all about a particular Internet Ike Turner's mental illness. And yes, from what readers have sent me of their ramblings, several of them are clearly mentally ill. But in focusing on any particular Ike's probable mental illness, you're missing the main point. The main point is that the Internet Ike Turners are threats. Threats to be managed by proper security precautions and techniques. To a woman who is wounded, maimed or killed by an Internet Ike Turner (like Asia McGowan) does it matter if they're mentally ill? NO, it doesn't matter.

A secondary point that many women want to fixate on is that the mentally ill Ikes are encouraged and supported by a viciously sexist African-American subculture that supports violence against Black women and girls. Modern African-American culture supports, encourages, and excuses all sorts of violence against Black women and girls. From the sexual molestation of Black girls that R. Kelley's Black fans support, to the beating of women that Chris Brown's Black fans loudly support. Does any of this matter to a woman who is wounded, maimed, or killed by an Internet Ike Turner? NO, it doesn't matter.

Ladies, focus on what matters! What matters is taking proper security precautions for your online and offline activities. I would strongly urge you to take the steps I've outlined above in terms of your online work.

In terms of any offline gatherings that you sponsor, I would strongly urge you to hire security. From what I've been told, several Internet Ike Turners are making threats of physically disrupting future events sponsored by and for African-American women. You need to take these threats seriously and prepare for them.

As an additional step, I would urge event organizers to hire a private investigator to film and photograph EVERY Black male that:

(1) Seeks entry into the event (since they have no legitimate reason for being there unless they are an invited speaker); and/or

(2) loiters around outside the event; and/or

(3) appears to be watching who's going in and out of any event that you're sponsoring.

Some of the Internet Ike Turners might not be bold enough to try to physically crash your event; but some of them will want to conduct hostile surveillance on the Black women who attend your event. You need to watch the people who are watching you. This is what law enforcement agencies do in terms of filming activists at protest marches.

Ladies, get real about your own safety and the safety of your guests.

Wildest Dreams Checklist: "Good Luck And Fine Quality For 10,000 Years"

2009-08-07T19:52:00.014-05:00

Lately, I've been paying close attention to the overheard conversations of the African-Americans I randomly encounter at work, in restaurants, in stores, walking down the streets.

I'm rediscovering why I usually tune out such things.

When did we become so uncompromisingly . . . small? When did we become satisfied with living LOW- and NO-impact lives?

On one level, I suppose that this is to be expected from people who are barely making ends meet. What's the excuse for members of the so-called "talented tenth"?

Our thoughts are . . . small.
Our dreams are even smaller.
There is no ambition.
There are no grand visions of making a lasting mark during one's life.

What happened to us?

I look at this and contrast it with examples of other people who made marks that have endured for generations. People who had long-term, grand visions. Visions that were "built to last."

The next time you see a bottle of Kikkoman soy sauce, please be aware that this family-owned Japanese company has existed for 17 generations. Kikkoman started as a small, regional soy sauce business in 1630, using a recipe invented by the widow of one of the samurai of Prince Hideyori. The firm began exporting soy sauce in 1868. Centuries of Success: Lessons From the World's Most Enduring Family Businesses, pg. 27.

The next time you see a Kikkoman bottle, please be aware that the characters for the brand name "Kikkoman" can be translated as "good luck and fine quality for 10,000 years." That's quite an ambitious vision for one's business! The Mogi family also carefully considered the values that they wanted to pass on to future generations of the family and family business.

"In the late 1700s or early 1800s the Mogis established a family constitution institutionalizing their cooperative effort to concentrate talent and experience in shoyu [soy sauce] manufacture at Noda. Among other things the short document noted:

'Sincerity first and profits will follow. Neglect neither . . . Avoid luxury and cultivate simplicity and earnestness . . . Attend to your health. Eat simple foods no different than those taken by your employees . . . Twice a year call a family meeting; praise family members according to their character and not according to their profits.' "

http://www.soyinfocenter.com/HSS/kikkoman.php

Are the effects of your choices "built to last"?

Will the effects of any of your choices endure?

Are you building anything that is intended to last?

What impact will your actions have on life 17 generations from now?

Geostrategy Nerd: The Federal Government Is Giving You A Hint

2009-08-03T18:58:00.013-05:00

The participants at this think tank have been discussing the need to escape Black residential areas since the post from 11/18/08 entitled "All Colored People That Want to Go To Kansas, On 9/5/1877, Can Do So for $5.00." http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2008/11/all-colored-people-that-want-to-go-to.html Leaving these Black residential areas is literally a matter of life and death for African-American women and children.

As many Black women's empowerment bloggers have noted, conditions within these majority-Black residential hellholes will only get worse as time goes on. In fact, the federal government is talking about razing sections of 50 economically depressed cities like Detroit, and letting nature reclaim the bulldozed districts! I would expect that most of these cities have substantial African-American populations. Whatever the outcome of this plan, it won't be a pretty picture. The time to get out is NOW.

Here's the beginning of the Telegraph.co.uk news story at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5516536/US-cities-may-have-to-be-bulldozed-in-order-to-survive.html :

"US cities may have to be bulldozed in order to survive.

Dozens of US cities may have entire neighbourhoods bulldozed as part of drastic "shrink to survive" proposals being considered by the Obama administration to tackle economic decline. The government is looking at expanding a pioneering scheme in Flint, one of the poorest US cities, which involves razing entire districts and returning the land to nature. Local politicians believe the city must contract by as much as 40 per cent, concentrating the dwindling population and local services into a more viable area."

Here's a link to a blog post discussing the story:
http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/06/22/us_government_may_bulldoze_50_cities_create_more_green_space/
From the blog post:

"It seems virtually everyone——from Wall Street bankers to small business owners——has been affected by the economic downturn. Now, the recession’’s latest victims may be American cities. The Obama administration is reportedly considering plans to raze sections of 50 economically depressed US cities, condensing these towns’’ shrinking populations and city services to smaller areas. The plan, dubbed ""shrink to survive,"" may seem kooky, but it could be big news for environmentalists: In many cases, bulldozed districts would be returned to nature via forests or meadows.

. . . The list may surprise some, as it contains major metropolises like Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Memphis, as well as other former industrial hotspots. Kildee and some government officials believe that downsizing these economically depressed cities will provide citizens with greater quality of life and more efficiently utilize city services."

Right. Sure. This is about green space, and the remaining inhabitants' quality of life. No, it's more like pulling the plug on a dead patient.

True Fellowship, Part 3: An Extended Reader's Money Quote From Evia

2009-08-01T00:05:00.008-05:00

The Reader's Money Quote is a statement that is of such insight and importance that it merits frequent and loud repetition. These Reader's Money Quotes are from Evia, blog host of Black Female Interracial Marriage Ezine http://www.blackfemaleinterracialmarriage.com/. Evia and I had the following exchange during a recent post (my comments are in blue):

Evia said:

However, on the topic of REAL "friends," well I think volumes could be written about that because there are virtually no rules anymore. Therefore, lots of people are very UN-likeminded until the meaning of friendship. To one person, it means something totally different than it may mean to another person, yet both people are using the same word. This causes lots of confusion and disappointment.

For ex. when I was in college I had what I considered a close girlfriend. Everything was fine until she went into the hospital to have some surgery. She was there for a couple of days. She NEVER told me she was going into the hospital!! I only found out later when she came out. I was devastated! We talked about it afterwards and she said she didn't understand why that even bothered me. OMG!!

My take on this is that when you go into the hospital for surgery, you should WANT those people who are close to you to know about it and BE there for you. So when she didn't tell me about her surgery, IMO based on my background, that was an indication that she didn't consider me a close friend. That also told me that if I went into the hospital, she wouldn't consider it important to be there for me either. These are MAJOR values differences, and I knew at that point that we would most likely never be really "close".

However, both she and her mother had been born and raised in NYC (Harlem) and had taken on the whole array of NYC "individualistic" values whereas, I grew up on a rural farm down South and had "communal" values from that background, so our backgrounds were VERY different. It wasn't her fault and it wasn't mine. That was the first experience that made me realize the importance of VALUES and likemindedness and how they determine whether people will get along with each other satisfactorily and have a mutually satisfying relationship. I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm saying it's a lot more difficult.

And this has nothing to do with ethnicity or race because I've met continental African women and white women with whom I've bonded almost instantly, whereas I've met AA women who I know I could never bond with.

This is a very clear example of why people from very different thought systems and value systems cannot jell, in many cases. There are so many unspoken expectations and assumptions that will usually trip them up.

So I have **sisterfriends**, **friends**, and then I have a variety of acquaintances. A sisterfriend is a friend of the 1st degree. A sisterfriend is the type of friend who could live with me indefinitely. I would go all out for her and her children to the extent that I could, without harming myself. She is, in a sense, my "sister" with the full meaning of the word. I would expect her to do all of the same for me.

At this point in my life, I put energy into cultivating sisterfriends, and I've had a moderate degree of success. I'm finding women who also relish this type of REAL relationship. It requires HONEST talk though about your needs. You cannot make assumptions. You have to tell a potential sisterfriend the biggies that you expect and she does the same and then you both have to decide whether you're willing to come through for each other.

I think AA women need friends, but due to the massive breakdown of the fledgling AA culture which eats away at even supposedly close-knit family relationships, I think that every AA woman REALLY needs at least 2 sisterfriends and 3 or 4 would of course be a lot better. That would make a typical AA woman feel a lot less vulnerable, alone. A sisterfriend is a type of insurance.

You know there's a 95% that she'll be there for you when your "friends" and acquaintances call to give you excuses as to why they can't be there for you in whatever way. Also, you're her sisterfriend too. So the sisterfriend relationship requires obligations and responsibilities.

Human beings are not islands. We have been wired to need a variety of others.

Evia, I'm happy you talked at length about friendship. The topic is the very FIRST thing that I'm going to get back to in detail in August. It's the FIRST order of business for August.

. . . You're being very gracious. I grew up in Chicago (as did my parents), and that person's behavior sounds CRAZY to me (for somebody who calls themself a friend). The harsh reality is that there are a LOT of improperly socialized, SAVAGE AAs out there. You described one of them.

And I think it's a very good thing that you mentioned the reciprocity implications involved in this sort of crazy behavior. A so-called "friend" who does not expect you to be there for them does NOT expect to be there for you!

. . . [T]oo many AA women try to rely on their husbands and boyfriends to supply ALL of their emotional needs. Not only is that unhealthy (one person simply can't supply ALL of another person's emotional needs). But it also sets women up to be extremely needy and vulnerable in their relationships with men.

It also sets them up to be utterly destroyed by divorce/break-up. I've seen this happen over and over to women who felt that they didn't need friends or sisterfriends because they "had a man." It's NOT a pretty picture. In fact, I've been observing a BW coworker like this who's in the middle of a mini-breakdown right now because she threw away what few friendships she had as soon as she "got a man." Meanwhile, her ex-boyfriend held on to his friendships with "his boys" throughout their relationship. Now that he's broken up with her, she's almost catatonic.

I don't feel particularly sympathetic to her. She got what she created for herself.

Khadija, re my college chum and your comments above, this was a very eye-opening experience for me--having Freda as a "friend." She had been raised not to trust black people because her mother, a hard-working black woman had had a hard life. The mother was a very bitter bw. She had been preyed on by a good-looking, sweet-talking, womanizing bm. He impregnated her mother and abandoned her. To her mother's credit, she had pinched pennies to send my friend to a private girl's school in NYC and then Freda went on to college, which is where I met her.

Freda came from a very different background than me. She grew up around lots of predators, and with barely any protection from them. Her mother worked 2 jobs all of her life and provided a clean,comfortable home, but there was no time for Freda. Freda had been molested a couple of times while she was a teenager.

My childhood wasn't perfect, but I grew up in a safe environment surrounded by various adults in my extended family watching over me, protecting me. At the time, I thought they were TOO protective, but now I know better. I also always got enough attention from adults. It certainly sounds like you also had a bunch of people who protected you and were there for you.

Even today, I don't think Freda has ever gotten over some of those childhood experiences and the LACK that was in her life during critical periods.

So after my initial hurt, I just accepted her as she was and knew that we could never be "close."

Evia, Thanks for explaining the history behind your college chum. I knew there had to be something SERIOUSLY wrong with that person. It's NOT normal to act like that regarding somebody you call a real "friend."

Yes, I was also BLESSED to grow up being protected and loved by many, many adults around me. Unfortunately, that sort of emotional and physical security are becoming unknown among AA children.

There are a LOT of sociopaths among our people. These bizarre attitudes toward friendship (like what you described about your college acquaintance), and the inability to form close friendships are a part of that syndrome.

That's why I was horrified by some of the statements made during the True Fellowship discussions (which I'm going to revisit in August). I was shocked and appalled to see people say out loud, in public, statements like "I don't want any friends." That's mentally SICK. For real. And it's the kind of statement that I hear from sociopathic clients. IIRC, the inability to make or keep friends is one of the DSM-IV-listed symptoms of Antisocial Personality Disorder!

Peace, blessings and solidarity.

We already know what the problems are. We know that the social fabric among our people has been destroyed. We know what extreme isolation and non-reciprocity can lead to for African-American women and other Black women. http://longbench.wordpress.com/2008/07/03/esmin-green-died-alone/

I don't want to keep talking about the problems. We already know what's wrong. I'm tired of seeing the conversation pattern that exists at many African-American blogs: People go round and round over the problems. If somebody offers concrete, actionable suggestions, these suggestions are ignored in favor of engaging in yet another round of (often insincere) hand-wringing.

For example, I recently watched a heckler-troll at another blog (who is apparently angry with the idea of African-American women divesting from dangerous and non-reciprocating scenarios) completely ignore the list of concrete actions that I suggested she could take in support of an 8 year old Liberian girl who was recently gang-raped by four boys.

She had used this girl's suffering to try to score a debate point against divestment; and I responded by giving her a list of actions that she could take in support of this girl, since she claimed to be concerned about this particular child. Actions that nobody is stopping her from doing, such as: (1) reaching out to the local prosecutor’s office, and local victim advocacy groups to find out what specific needs this little girl might have right now, and (2) coordinating donations for this little girl.

Instead of taking up the mantle of ACTION, this woman repeated her already-answered question by asking the blog host, "The Arizona authorities are taking care of the child, what do you suggest should be done next?" As if it's a reasonable assumption that ALL of the child's needs (including long-term needs) are being met by "the Arizona authorities." Right. Sure.

How quickly people wriggle out of assuming any responsibility whatsoever for taking action! This is the same type of bad-faith nonsense that "Internet Ike Turners" like to engage in (falsely professed concern about issues that they have NO intention of doing anything about).

Let's STOP playing these sorts of games with the life and death matters that are facing us. It's time to revisit some solutions. It's time for people who are sincere and serious to take concrete actions in support of their values. Part 2 of the True Fellowship series mentioned several concrete actions we can take to create true fellowships in our lives. http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2008/10/true-fellowship-part-2-breaking-bread.html

Over the months, I've been delighted to hear periodic updates from a reader and fellow blogger named ForeverLoyal (her blog is at http://foreverloyal.wordpress.com/) about the concrete steps that she's taken to enhance her relationship with a close friend.

It's really up to each one of us.

Departures, Part 2: Let's Revisit Natalie White's Success In South Korea

2009-07-30T20:57:00.010-05:00

Now's a good time to revisit an earlier post from April 2009 that discussed a sister named Natalie White. http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/04/wildest-dreams-checklist-will-you-be.html

Ms. White has been in the news, including one news story that was featured on the South Korean government's official website. http://www.korea.net/news/news/newsView.asp?serial_no=20090311001

Enjoy!

Al-Walaa Wal Baraa, Part 2: Why People Betray Their Own Values

2009-07-27T23:05:00.012-05:00

Counterintelligence agencies have discovered that there are several basic reasons why people engage in espionage and treason. Security officials often use the acronym MICE as a summary: money, ideology, compromise and ego.

It's interesting to note that these same motivations are the reasons why everyday people act in ways that betray their own values.

I would add "Carelessness" and "social Coercion" to the above list of MICE factors.

There's a science to betrayal and enticing people to act in ways contrary to their values. This science applies to all sorts of seemingly different situations. Those of us who are serious about maintaining our own values, and raising our children to maintain their values need to understand this science.

Strategic Forecasting, Inc., more commonly known as Stratfor, is a private intelligence agency founded in 1966 in Austin, Texas. Barron's once referred to it as "The Shadow CIA." George Friedman is the founder, chief intelligence officer, and CEO of the company.

Here's some background reading I'd like people to keep in mind as we continue to talk about our values. The following article is from http://www.stratfor.com/

"Security Implications of the Global Financial Crisis
March 4, 2009 1813 GMT

By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart

As anyone with a stock portfolio knows, it is a rough time for the markets. With many portfolios down 50 percent or more, this large loss of equity and wealth has been very difficult on individuals and corporations. The problems, of course, have not been confined to the stock markets. With property values plunging and variable-rate mortgages ballooning, many homeowners are also caught in a bad situation — the number of homeowners behind in their mortgage payments has been increasing and the number of foreclosures has grown.

Unemployment is also an issue. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in January 2009 there were 2,227 mass layoff actions in the United States involving 237,902 workers. Significantly, the financial crisis is not just restricted to the United States — it is a global event that is also having a severe impact on economies in Europe, Asia and the developing world. Things are tough all over, and this financial strain will create some large security problems for corporations and governments.

Threats to the Bottom Line

During times of financial hardship, companies often have to make cuts like the aforementioned layoffs. When companies plan cuts, they often focus on eliminating those corporate functions that do not appear to be contributing to the company’s profitability. And one of the first functions cut during tough times often is corporate security. A security department typically has a pretty substantial budget (it costs a lot for all those guards, access-control devices, cameras and alarms), and security is usually viewed as detracting from, rather than contributing to, the company’s bottom line. The “fat” security budget is seen as an easy place to quickly reduce costs in an effort to balance the profit-and-loss statement.

This view of security is due to a number of factors. First, it must be recognized that there are certainly some security programs that are indeed bloated and ill-conceived that have consumed far too many corporate resources for the results they produce. Furthermore, there is a long tradition of corporate security directors who are not good communicators and who do not take the effort to educate upper management about ways their programs contribute to corporate goals.

However, even when a security director has an effective program and is a good communicator, it can be very difficult to quantify the losses that the corporation did not suffer due to the presence of effective security measures. The lack of losses and incidents due to a robust security program can be interpreted by some to mean that there is no threat to guard against. Indeed, effective security can make it appear that there is no need for security, a paradox we have also seen in the historical pattern of U.S. government security funding — a pattern that has resulted in a number of disastrous attacks against U.S. embassies.

In times of economic hardship, the relentless focus on operating expenses and even corporate cutbacks can lead to definite security challenges. As we discussed last November, one of these problems is workplace violence, but during times when people are hurting financially, issues such as employee theft, fraud and product theft by non-employees must also be carefully monitored.

However, while the theft of a tractor-trailer full of computers or flat screen televisions can quickly get someone’s attention, there is a far more subtle, and no less dangerous, threat lurking just under the surface. That threat is espionage — both corporate and state-sponsored.

The Human-Intelligence Process

Espionage is always a problem corporations must face. Competitors, criminals and even foreign governments often seek ways to gather proprietary information from companies, sometimes to boost their own operational capacities (e.g., to apply critical or emerging technologies to their weapons programs) and sometimes to sell on the open market.

Once a company has been identified as having the information sought, the first thing the human intelligence practitioner will do is look for weak links in the targeted company’s operations. If the required information is readily available, there is no need to undertake a time-intensive and costly operation to retrieve it. Indeed, it is shocking to see the amount of sensitive and critical information that is openly available on the Internet and in research libraries, or that is freely given out at technical conferences.

When open source collection efforts fail, more invasive measures must be employed. Sometimes the required information can be obtained via technical surveillance. A faulty information technology system, for example, can expose the company’s secrets via remote electronic intrusion conducted from a continent away. Other times, information can be obtained by eavesdropping on telephone calls made by corporate leaders or by using other technical surveillance measures.

However, technical surveillance has its limitations, and sometimes critical information must be obtained through human intelligence, which means obtaining the required data from an employee working within the targeted company. Due to human nature, human-intelligence practitioners use the same time-tested principles in the recruitment of corporate sources that they use when recruiting sources in the government sector. (The risks associated with obtaining unclassified proprietary information from private companies are often far less than those associated with obtaining classified information from government agencies or national research laboratories.)

The first step in the human-intelligence process is called spotting. This is when the human intelligence practitioner attempts to identify those workers who have access to the required information. Then the practitioner conducts a thorough examination of the backgrounds and situations of the employees who have that access in an effort to determine which employee is most vulnerable to exploitation. Employees who are in dire need of extra cash to maintain extravagant lifestyles or to support drinking, drug or gambling habits, or those who are hiding extramarital affairs or other secrets that can be used for blackmail, make prime candidates.

A background check might also reveal that a certain worker is angry with his or her employer over issues of salary or placement in the company. There also are employees who disagree ideologically with the product their company makes or the process the company uses to produce it. Finally, there are the employees whose egos are so big that they might be willing to risk committing industrial espionage just to prove they can get away with it. Robert Hanssen, an ex FBI special agent accused of selling secrets to Russia, was motivated by the belief that he was above the system and could commit espionage without being caught.

Of the four major motivations for committing espionage — money, ideology, compromise and ego (known to security officials as MICE) — money has proven to be the No. 1 motivation, though two or more motivations can be used to turn an employee. More often than not, simple bribery is sufficient to obtain the desired information, especially if the employee is living beyond his or her means for one reason or another. Outside agents looking to turn an employee can also use blackmail (“compromise” in the MICE acronym).

Demanding proprietary information in exchange for not exposing a personal secret, for instance, is a cost-effective approach that also allows the agent to return again and again to the same source. This method is a bit riskier, however, since it can cause more resentment than other means and make the source more likely to rebel. However, sexual entrapment and blackmail is still widely used as a recruitment tactic, one that has been used with great success in recent years by the Chinese government against targets such as Japanese and Taiwanese government officials, FBI special agents — and foreign businessmen.

Emphasizing the ‘M’

Once the practitioner has identified the weakest link, decided on the approach to take and made a specific plan on how to proceed, the next step in the human-intelligence process is to actually approach the employee and “pitch” him or her. This step is often a gradual effort to establish a relationship of trust between the practitioner and the employee, and contact can begin gradually with requests for small, seemingly harmless bits of information such as internal phone numbers. In this approach, known as the “little hook,” the employee is offered “gifts” in exchange for these favors.

The requests gradually become greater in scope until the targeted information is obtained. Other times, the pitch is far more blatant and the human-intelligence practitioner does not take the time to establish a relationship or gradually recruit the target. Instead the practitioner makes a flat-out cash offer for the required goods or shows the target the evidence that will be used for blackmail.

In the current economic environment, with many 401(k) plans now more like 201(k)s, stock options severely underwater and homeowners facing foreclosure, cold hard cash — the M in MICE — is an even more attractive approach. In fact, with employees seeing their investment accounts decline dramatically, and perhaps even facing the possibility of home foreclosure, it is not at all unreasonable to anticipate that companies and foreigners will face a windfall of walk-in sources who will volunteer to sell critical information — and in such a buyer’s market, information can often be bought at fire-sale prices.

Employees attempting to sell proprietary information are somewhat common; one of the most publicized examples of this in recent years was the disgruntled Coca-Cola Co. employee who was arrested in July 2006 after attempting to sell Coke’s recipe to rival soft drink company Pepsi.

Mass layoffs also complicate the equation, especially when some of the employees being laid off have access to critical information. If measures are not taken to ensure that the information is protected, the information could easily find itself in the hands of competing companies or even foreign intelligence services.

Not Just a Corporate Concern

The current financial crisis — and vulnerability to espionage — is not just confined to the private sector. There are many federal government employees in the United States who have watched their investments in the stock-based funds of the government’s Thrift Savings Plan wither on the vine over the past two years, and judging from the performance of foreign stock exchanges, the investments of employees in other governments have followed suit.

Additionally, government employees tend to live in places with very expensive real estate, like Washington, London, Paris and Tokyo. This means that a foreign intelligence officer armed only with a briefcase full of dollars, euros or yen can make a killing. With many corporate security departments being cut to the bone, many internal security services focused on the counterterrorism mission and many law enforcement agencies chasing white-collar criminals, it is a good time to be in the intelligence business.

One day we will look back on this time through a counterintelligence lens and see that, although it was a time of bear stock markets, it was a tremendous bull market for practitioners of human intelligence.

This report may be forwarded or republished on your website with attribution to http://www.stratfor.com/"

Al-Walaa Wal Baraa---Allegiance And Aversion Based On Values, Part 1

2009-07-25T11:34:00.067-05:00

In preparation for the discussions I hope to begin in August, I've been asking the audience to reflect on what values they're taking with them into "the lands of the living." However, I haven't given any concrete examples of why I believe this is important. I also haven't mentioned any of the angles I want people to consider in reference to their values. I hope to rectify that omission with this post.

Next month, I would like to have a series of conversations about what we draw close to (and why), and what we distance ourselves from (and why). These two factors determine the course (and sometimes the duration) of our lives! In terms of Islam, the concept is called in Arabic: al-walaa wal baraa.

For this series, let's work from the specific out to the general. In this post, let's first look at some specific incidents and I'll review them in light of considerations that are part of my particular faith tradition.

I. Preliminary Matters: Why I'm Using Traditional Terminology

For this conversation, I'm going to mostly use traditional terms to describe certain concepts. When discussing matters of faith, I try to stick as close to possible to the terminology used in the Quran, and by traditional religious scholars. I believe that it's dangerous to deviate from the clearly-defined, known earlier terms.

Let me give a secular example. "Messence" magazine has started doing an apparently yearly feature on what it calls "Do-Right Men." Well, the more this was discussed on various blogs, the more people realized that there didn't seem to be any real criteria to being referred to as a "Do-Right Man." From their interviews, these men did NOT sound as if they were ultimately looking for wives. Nor did they even sound as if they were looking for "serious" relationships. Some of these men apparently already had girlfriends.

But yet Messence was encouraging Black women to celebrate and respond to these men as if these men were eligible bachelors. I realized that Messence had done yet another "bait and switch" on its readers. It was encouraging Black women to respond to these men as if they met the criteria of being eligible bachelors (men who are called such because they are interested in and eligible for marriage), when these men never verbally signed-on to the "eligible bachelor" package.

With this verbal bait and switch, Messence was encouraging its readers to pin eligible bachelor hopes onto men who were just looking for a good time (some of whom were already hooked-up to somebody else). This sort of "bait and switch" is often what happens when we get away from traditional, known terminology and start using new terms.

People are then free to define these new terms however they wish. Such as so-called Do-Right Man versus what it takes to be an Eligible Bachelor. So, this Messence example is one reason why I believe that it's safest to stick with the already clearly-defined and known terminology when discussing certain things.

II. Preliminary Matters: Glossary

Fiqh: Muslim jurisprudence. The science which deals with the observance of rituals, the principles of the Five Pillars [the fundamental tenets or requirements of Islam which are accepted as such unequivocally by all branches], and social legislation. The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam, pg. 126, 132.

Al-Walaa Wal Baraa: "Al-walaa means loyalty and al-baraa means disownment. In the context of Islaam al-walaa is loyalty to Allaah and whatever He is pleased with as well as friendship and closeness to the believers, whereas al-baraa is freeing oneself from that which is displeasing to Allaah and disowning the disbelievers." Al-Walaa' wal-Baraa, pg. 3 Shaykh Saalih bin Fawzaan al Fawzaan.

The point is for Muslims to draw close to that which is pleasing to God, and to distance themselves away from that which is displeasing to God. Unfortunately, extremists tend to reduce the concept of al-walaa wal baraa down to "loving and hating for the sake of God." {shudder}

Since I'm speaking to a mixed audience of Muslims, non-Muslims, believers and non-believers, let me put this specific concept into a more general context: I believe that it's essential that we draw close to that which supports our deepest values; and that we distance ourselves away from that which is opposed to our deepest values.

A large part of the reason why the African-American collective is in a state of free fall is because most of us don't have any clear values. Those of us who do have values generally fail to integrate these values into the fabric of our everyday lives. Such people only pull their values out for "special occasions."

Most African-Americans are not grounded in anything at all.

Our lack of basic, firm grounding is also the reason why we are so easily deceived and pulled off course.

III. Preliminary Matters: The Fiqh of Balances

"When interests conflict, an interest of a lower status is sacrificed for the sake of a higher interest, and an interest of a private nature is sacrificed for the sake of a common interest; and the owner of the private interest is to be compensated for his loss. Also in cases of conflicting interests, a temporary interest is forsaken in favour of a long term or permanent interest; a superficial interest is disregarded for the sake of a real interest, and a definite interest is given precedence over a doubtful interest." Priorities of The Islamic Movement in the Coming Phase, by Shaykh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, pg. 48.

"If evils conflict, and some of them are indispensable, then one should choose the lesser of the two evils and the smaller of the two harms. Muslim jurists have prescribed that harm should be eliminated as much as possible. A harm should not be eliminated with a harm of the same nature or with a greater harm. A minor harm should be tolerated if such tolerance would make it possible to avoid a major harm; and a specific harm should be tolerated if it alleviates a general harm.

. . . If interests and evils conflict, they should be examined carefully in terms of their size, effect and duration. A slight evil should be forgiven for the sake of realising a major interest. A temporary evil should be forgiven for the sake of realising a long term or permanent interest. Even a great evil should be accepted if its elimination would lead to a greater evil. In normal conditions, the avoidance of evil should come before the realizing of interest." Priorities of The Islamic Movement in the Coming Phase, by Shaykh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, pg. 49.

A word about weighing evils: It's extremely dangerous. Especially for confused people. Confused people like most African-Americans who are NOT firmly rooted or grounded in any clear values whatsoever. I've made the following comment on other blogs:

"What people don't seem to comprehend is that by presuming to weigh evil, you are putting your hands on it. The taint rubs off and seeps into your skin. It's dangerous to try to weigh evil. Evil must be fought, NOT measured! I believe this is why those people who have settled for so-called "lesser" evils get so angry with people who refuse to compromise their principles. They are usually angrier with the non-compromisers than they are with the so-called "lesser" evil. They are envious of how the non-compromiser stayed clean of the "lesser" evil they compromised with."

There are many times when we have to try to weigh evils and harms in assessing various situations and how we will react to them. However, we must always keep in mind the dangers involved in this process. We must continuously check back with our various touchstones---our scriptures and anything else that we use to guide our actions.

When we don't continuously refer back to our touchstones---or even worse, don't have any touchstones to check---we set ourselves up to be played and to do great harm to our own interests.

This sort of self-inflicted damage to our own interests is the general behavior pattern for most African-Americans. We don't react to events based on clear, firm values. We react based on emotions.

Let's examine some recent events in light of the above concepts. Keep in mind that I'm talking about examining situations based on values. I'm NOT talking about what specific legal concepts (such as due process, etc.) require various officials to do in a particular scenario. Legal codes do NOT necessarily reflect the ETHICS of a situation. Many of us lose sight of that.

[For clarity, I'll add that I support ideas such as "the rule of law," "due process," etc. That's why I started doing defense work. But that's not what I'm talking about here---I'm talking about values. So, let's keep that separate for this conversation.]

IV. The Prof. Henry Gates Incident

Is this a matter of public or private interest? Matters of public interest usually involve concerns greater than avenging a single wronged person. Let's first look to see how the purported "victim" in this situation, Prof. Henry Gates, is treating the matter. This should give us an idea as to what the person directly affected by the situation feels that it's about.

If this was about a principled stand against injustice, one would expect Prof. Gates and his supporters to be critical of everybody involved in the injustice. That's not happening here. The only person that Prof. Gates and Cheerleaders seem critical of is the White, male police officer who arrested him. Not the White female neighbor who made the call to the police department. One might expect her to recognize her own neighbor during the afternoon when the sun was shining. Not the Black male police officer who was present during the arrest. One might expect a Black officer to refrain from aiding and abetting racist police misconduct against other Black people.

Here's part of a comment I made at another blog [Acts of Faith in Love and Life; it's on my sidebar]:

"Another irritant is that we never address the fact that there are often Black police officers present during this type of misconduct. On what basis do we focus ALL of our rage on the White officers present?

I tend to be angrier with Black officers who collaborate with racists. Historically, AAs protested to get more AAs hired as police, and THIS is what some of them do?

IIRC, I saw a Black-looking officer in the foreground of a video still picture of Prof. Gates being arrested. Well, who was that colored boy in uniform? Are any of the outraged AA voices talking about that particular individual? Is there a local Black police officers' league? If so, is this group talking about/to that individual? Are any of these outraged AAs talking to the local Black police group about that person (if such a local group exists)?

The presence of Black-skinned officers during racist police misconduct incidents is not rare. This sort of thing raises the question of whether or not it makes sense for AAs to continue to clamor to have Black-skinned police officers. Maybe we need to find some other criteria to use for lobbying for various people to get hired. Skin color alone is obviously not it.

. . . Faith, yes, from talking to relatives who are in law enforcement there IS what I'll call a "Serpico Effect": Any cop who is not down with the program (be it racist, or simply corrupt) can find themselves without back-up if/when their life is in danger at work.

From what I've been told, this isn't always the case. But it happens enough to keep most people in check.

However, going along with the program is no guarantee of safety at work for Black officers. Even if they 'go along to get along' with racist coworkers, Black officers are still much more liable to be shot BY OTHER OFFICERS when working in plainclothes or undercover. Despite police protestations that everybody's "blue," a BM is a BM is a BM to racist Whites. And if they mess up and shoot a BM who turns out to have a badge...oh well, ooops.

I've heard similar "Serpico Effect" tales from several WW I've known who are in law enforcement.

On a non-life-threatening level, similar career pressures often apply to Black prosecutors---the Christopher Darden Gambit---where they dig a Black prosecutor out of the basement office to be a Black face prosecuting high-profile AAs.

But all of this brings into question one's personal integrity and how cheaply one is willing to sell oneself.

My refusal to be used like that is one of several reasons why I quit my first job as prosecutor after about a year; and it didn't take long for me to see "what time it was" at that office. The crazy/dishonest/racist officers quickly learned that they could NOT trust me to blindly buy into whatever they wrote in their police reports. They also knew that they couldn't "joke" about "testi-lying" in my presence. Unfortunately, there are PLENTY of colored prosecutors that entertain that mess.

Nobody is REQUIRED to keep a job where the work environment demands that you collaborate with evil. Most jobs are not the Mafia---you CAN quit. You can look for another job that doesn't require you to be an accomplice to evil. And I don't believe people who claim that it took them many years to figure out what was going on at their job. NO! They knew. They just didn't care until something happened and they were exposed as the ultra-cheap prostitutes that they are."

Prof. Gates is responding to this incident as if it's about some personal grudge against White, male authority figures. That lets me know that this is primarily a private interest that does not require public intervention from others. Prof. Gates can seek redress through a lawsuit or an administrative complaint against the officer.

What's the size, effect and duration of the harm(s) involved? Is somebody seriously wounded or dead as a result of wrongdoing? From my earlier comment:

"Another irritant is wondering how long will it take for AAs (of all economic classes) to get it through our heads that it's NOT a good idea to have a direct confrontation with racist police out in "the world." By yourself. Where it's their word against yours. Where they could shoot you dead and be done with it.

Why is it that so many of us (who should know better) have not considered how critical it is to keep our heads in such circumstances? Why is it that so many of us (especially so-called "prominent" Black folks) haven't thought through what they're going to do when something like that happens?

Whatever the possible strategies might be in such circumstances, trying to fuss at armed police...by yourself...with their word against yours...is NOT the move to make.

Prof. Gates was blessed that they didn't just put a bullet hole in his head. And lay a "drop gun" (or something else metallic) beside his dead body. These things do happen. And most of us know this. When faced with these situations, why do so many of us still respond as if we don't know this?"

Prof. Gates could have been killed. He wasn't. Prof. Gates could have been beaten. He wasn't. He was blessed that the only injury was to his pride. It could have been much, MUCH worse. Serious injuries and/or fatalities weigh in favor of making the matter one of public interest that requires public intervention.

Serious injuries and fatalities can also weigh heavily against someone who was otherwise a victim in the particular incident. Victims whose inappropriate behavior or bad choices cause death or serious injuries to themselves or others lose much of their entitlement to support from others.

In any event, serious injuries or fatalities didn't happen here, thank God.

Is dealing with this particular incident going to damage a long-term or permanent interest? Let's examine this point in terms of the Black people who were calling for Pres. Obama to speak out about the Prof. Gates Incident. Let's look at what this means in terms of our long-term interests as African-Americans. From my earlier comments at Faith's blog:

"Yep. As I've stated before, this 'racism is officially over because there's a Black president' meme is part of the price tag of having the Obama-ssiah in the White House. One of MANY, somewhat-hidden price tags that AAs have ignored while enjoying our Obama-ssiah-induced-delirium.

. . . Yes, there's going to be various forms of blowback for our Pavlovian, knee-jerk whining about this incident. Blowback that we haven't bothered to consider, much less calculate.

For just one example, the Obama-ssiah has chosen to expend a bit of his "non-threatening Black male" currency with Whites over the Skip Gates Affair. The President (who has to maintain favor with Whites) is NOT going to readily do this again...if EVER again. His statement about the Skip Gates Affair is the only bone he's going to throw to AAs for a LONG time. It might be the ONLY bone he throws us throughout his term.

Since Pres. Obama has only budgeted about 1, maybe 2, "bones" specifically for AA concerns, did we really want to spend one of these bones/crumbs of Presidential attention on Skip Gates? It's one thing if we had decided that the Skip Gates Affair was worthy of using up our 1 scrap of attention/input from the first Black President. But, we didn't make that calculation. Even worse, we're not even aware that this sort of calculation is being made by the Obama-ssiah!

We're too silly to comprehend that Pres. Obama's statements about Skip Gates means that when the next 'Katrina'-type thing happens disproportionately to AAs, then he will feel that he CAN'T afford to respond to our concerns.

In terms of the next 'Katrina' to hit AAs, Pres. Obama is going to respond with the same empty platitudes that Bush used. He will do this because he already spent that 'I'm going to anger White folks' chip on the Skip Gates Affair."

Just based on this one angle, it was NOT a good thing (in terms of our long-term collective interests) that Pres. Obama commented on the Prof. Henry Gates Incident. That's not even factoring in the damage that's done by Pres. Obama saying something, and then diluting or retracting his statements. It's usually better to say and do nothing than to say and do something weak.

Many of us enjoy "sticking it to" White men, or wealthy Black folks, or whatever targets we choose. Or we enjoy giving knee-jerk support to the poor and other people that we've decided are "underdogs." I'm not immune to those considerations. It was a large part of why I enjoyed the political career of former Congressman Gus Savage. He had a real talent for making local, racist Whites VERY angry. It's part of why I've been deeply amused by many of the public statements of a local (White) Catholic priest, Father Michael Pfleiger. Father Pfleiger has a similar talent for infuriating racist Whites. So, I can relate to indulging in these sorts of pleasures. However, NOT at the expense of other, more serious considerations.

I can think of some other angles of analysis about the Prof. Gates Incident (important questions like reciprocity---does Prof. Gates have any personal history of speaking out against injustice, etc.), but you get the point.

V. The Chanequa Campbell Incident at Harvard

We talked about this during some earlier conversations. http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/05/reality-check-african-americans-still.html and http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/06/postscript-to-racial-discipline.html I won't repeat my detailed thoughts about that situation. But you can run through the partial checklist of considerations that influenced my thoughts about that situation.

Is this a matter of public or private interest?

What's the size, effect and duration of the harm(s) involved? Is somebody seriously wounded or dead as a result of wrongdoing?

Is dealing with this particular incident going to damage a long-term or permanent interest?

You might draw conclusions that are the opposite of mine! *Smile* That doesn't bother or concern me. What does concern me is the widespread African-American mental habit of making knee-jerk, emotion-based responses to anything and everything.

VI. Summary

I would like you to reflect on your deepest-held values.

Where did you get them?

What are they based on?

Do you frequently refer back to your touchstones---your scriptures and anything else that you use to guide your actions?

An Invitation To Pause, Ponder, And Reflect

2009-07-19T20:04:00.015-05:00

It feels like we've covered a lot of ground in the past couple of weeks. I see that I've written more than my usual number of blog posts for the month. Much of this was prompted in response to some truly outstanding essays by other bloggers such as Faith and Blue Butterfly.

We've talked about some extremely important matters that deserve further reflection. Let's pause to reflect some more on the things we've recently discussed. I've decided not to write any more new posts for the rest of the month. Let's continue to consider what's already on the table.

I had already planned to study the Quran in search of more guidance regarding the truly unprecedented circumstances that we're facing as African-American women at this point in history. I would ask you to also take some time to read and reflect upon whatever scriptures you rely upon for guidance.

I would also ask you to prepare to turn the page when (inshallah--"God willing") I get back to writing some new posts in August. We've been talking about a lot of dead and dying things lately. This has been necessary in order to warn people about the various tricks and snares used to keep them trapped in the dead zones.

I hope to shift our focus back to our plans to survive, thrive and enjoy a 21st century renaissance in the coming days.

CW, blog host of The CW Experience, has an outstanding post up about the importance of cutting the dead loose. Among other questions worthy of reflection, she makes the following points:

"Probing Question: Can the refusal to break ties with The Dead here on earth cause us the same misery (of not more) as attempting to contact The Dead who are already long buried and gone?

. . . The Bible admonishes us not to communicate with “familiar spirits”…Again this results in death…The living who refuse to heed this commandment are also doomed to be deceived…The above passage refers to someone trying to connect with the dearly departed…I ask the reader to go one step further and consider the outcome of those who consistently remain in the presence of The Dead walking on earth…

-Death only wants access in order to constantly influence the living from the grave…By communicating with The Dead in either case, we are opening doors for confusion and negativity…

. . . There are startling parallels in relation to handling both the physically & mentally dead…In both instances improper handling of The Dead can lead to undesirable results…The implications are clear…In both cases a line of separation needs to be made between the living and The Dead…" http://thecwexperience.wordpress.com/2009/07/20/let-the-dead-bury-the-dead/ (emphasis added).

So, as we depart from the lands of the dead and the dying, let's consider what we're going to take with us on our journey into better days. Let's take the time to reflect on what values, ideas, and things are really important to us. I know that my various Quran translations, my iPod, and a kettlebell are definitely coming with me. I have to sift through the rest of my various types of intellectual, emotional, spiritual, and physical belongings to see what else is really important to me.

What values and ideas really matter to you? What are you going to take with you into the land of the living?

Departures, Part 1: Seeking Our God-Given Rights

2009-07-19T11:21:00.007-05:00

It's always annoying to hear (sometimes confused, often oppressive) Black people claim that any African-American (especially any African-American woman) who wants a good life is somehow "acting White" or under the influence of Whites.

That's crazy. And shows that the person saying this madness has never been exposed to actual Black Nationalist thought. To mention just one example, Elijah Muhammad promised to help his followers acquire "money, good homes, and friendship in all walks of life." Here's a modern, current example of one of his followers describing what we are entitled to. Unlike orthodox Islam, the Nation of Islam has female clergy. Over the years, I've always enjoyed hearing lectures by Sis. Min. Ava Muhammad. She's an engaging, dynamic speaker. And it amuses me to be able to relate to her as a fellow former prosecutor and attorney. Don't assume that everybody in the Nation of Islam is a down and out former convict. They're not. [Audience note: I've never been a member of the Nation of Islam. I'm a Sunni, "orthodox" Muslimah.]

Here's the link to a video of Sis. Min. Ava Muhammad talking about what we are entitled to (among other topics).http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8OeCZIToAg

My favorite portions are the following:

She starts talking about what we're entitled to at around 1:51 into the video: "We have a right to have good health, adequate nutrition, good shelter, to be able to avoid unnecessary and non-beneficial pain. To have pleasurable experiences in life. These aren't things that come from a program. These are your natural, human right(s)."

At around 3:36 into the video: "We have got to stop allowing people to teach us that poverty and deprivation is righteousness. That's how we were kept in chains for 400 years."

At around 4:05 into the video: "You have a duty to yourself, your family, and your community to be all you can be and to get all you can get morally in this life. We have to want more and stop teaching ourselves to be satisfied with nothing."

Alhamdulilah! [Praise God!]

We're going to have some specific conversations about making our various departures into better lives. Have you picked a destination? Have you packed ONLY the things that really matter to you? And ONLY the things that are actually helpful? Are you ready to go?

The End Of The Road For African-Americans, Part 2: Generation(s) Apathetic

2009-07-18T17:06:00.049-05:00

The End Of The Road For African-Americans, Part 1: There Is NO "Black Community"

2009-07-17T23:33:00.012-05:00

Get REAL With Scripture: When Properly Used, It Can Save Your Life

2009-07-16T00:32:00.017-05:00

Faith, blog host of Acts of Faith in Love and Life, linked to this AMAZING blog post in one of her recent comments at another blog. It's a MUST-READ-right-now sort of post that shows just how relevant and real scripture can be when properly explained. http://swordofgoliath.blogspot.com/2009/07/jezebel-darling-who-lied-to-you.html

Too many of us read our various scriptures as if they were fairy tales with no relevance to real life. And that's the handful of us who bother to actually read the scriptures we claim to believe in. Most of us don't read, and depend upon our various ministers, imams, etc. to spoonfeed us their understanding of God's Word. Here's the part of the post that sent shivers down my spine:

"One of the worst things that can happen to any woman is to get involved in any way with an Ahab.

. . . The Ahabs are mind bending, heart breaking, and soul eroding opportunists. Ahabs can spot your low self-esteem in high heels from across the room. Ahabs can see beyond the make-up, weaves, highlights and fake skin tones. Ahabs can see the size 22 mind inside the size 2 mini. Ahabs can see all those things and will use them to their advantage. Ahabs will use you to kill off your support system and kill off his enemies."

This behavior pattern is REAL. The same way God's warning to Lot and his family to NOT look back at Sodom and Gomorrah as they were fleeing was real. These are stories about humans that describe various types of human behavior patterns. People haven't changed; and their behavior patterns haven't changed. These are repeating patterns.

The point of relaying the stories of past people(s) is so that we'll recognize the patterns when we see them play out in our own lives. If God made the scriptures a catalogue of all the various past, present and future manifestations of various human behavior patterns, these books would be endless. Those who read and believe the scriptures are expected to use pattern recognition in their discernment.

This is what I hoped to remind people of when I went on a rant during a previous post:

"I was amazed by the 'shocked, shocked I say' outrage about the latest atrocity on Black Exploitation Television. I hesitated to say this before for fear of giving offense, but I feel compelled to say it openly now: I feel that this particular outrage (the apparent airing of child pornography during the 2009 BET Awards show) was yet another sign.

There were those people who could still be lured to turn back and look upon Sodom/BET. Just like Lot's wife looked back at Sodom in the Bible. She was supposedly running from the impending destruction of Sodom to save her life. But then she looked back; and was turned into a pillar of salt. I guess the point of that story is that, in order to survive, she was supposed to run away from that place and NEVER look back.

I believe that the disgusting spectacle that BET tricked these folks into watching (with false promises of some sort of tribute to Michael Jackson) was a warning that God gave out of His mercy. One of the FINAL warnings that will be given about the folly of continuing to "look back" and consume popular "Black" culture. For ANY reason whatsoever.

. . . I would strongly urge folks to STOP looking back at "Sodom":

Don't look back at BET-Sodom.

Don't look back at the "White Girl Song"-Sodom that Sara talks about in her latest post.

Don't look back at the Internet Ike Turner's blogs-Sodom or YouTube-Sodom.

Don't look back at entertainment products from DBRBM-Sodom.

Stop looking back at Sodom! God has let you slide for now. In His Grace, He has granted you a few more moments to make it out to safety. A few more moments to get clear of Sodom. But eventually you will be turned into a metaphorical pillar of salt if you continue to look back at what He does NOT want you to take in. You can't run forward while looking backward!"

I've been amazed that more people haven't identified BET, "Messence" magazine, and the rest of that material by the labels used in scripture to identify their prototypes. The only thing that's new about these modern negative messages are their formats. The message these entities are promoting (calling people toward abasement, degradation, and ultimately death) is NOT new. It's a very old message modeled on a very old template. And from a very old source.

Believers: Are you ready to stop being a passive spiritual consumer? Are you ready to read and study God's Word as an active student who's looking for the parallels with modern circumstances?

Are you ready, willing, and able to get real with your faith tradition's scripture?

Let's Revisit An Earlier Conversation: "Why Black Women Should Save Their OWN Lives By Leaving The Helping Professions"

2009-07-15T08:12:00.009-05:00

After prayer, the idea came to me that now would be a good time to revisit a couple of our earlier conversations that reviewed the MANY reasons why any African-American woman who wants to have a good life needs to leave the helping professions:

http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/04/case-study-of-why-black-women-should.html

http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/04/why-black-women-should-leave-helping.html

A Standing Ovation For Faith's 2 Most Recent Posts

2009-07-13T07:44:00.010-05:00

Faith, blog host of Acts of Faith In Love And Life (which is on my sidebar blogroll), is holding it down! With some help in the comments section by some of her astute readers like Anna (tertiary#anna), Felicia, and Brother Omi!

Please check out these two posts. And, since one of the individuals responsible for the dreadful Raising Him Alone {shudder} program is listening in to her blog discussions, consider sharing your thoughts about that program.

http://actsoffaithinloveandlife.blogspot.com/2009/07/society-does-not-actively-support.html

http://actsoffaithinloveandlife.blogspot.com/2009/07/national-brainwashing-plan-to-condone.html

As Faith correctly observes, "Telling women to expect to and prepare for raising children with no man present and no backup is like telling a five year old it's ok to go play in traffic."

It's a shame that most African-Americans have lost the ability to comprehend this very basic idea.

The Sojourner's Path: Find And Embrace The "Market" That's Best For YOU

2009-07-12T11:49:00.015-05:00

Let's get back to our "regularly scheduled programming" about personal transformation, and practical steps toward living out our Wildest Dreams. I've been reading a fascinating book titled How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World by a Libertarian ideologue named Harry Browne. The book can be found at http://www.trendsaction.com/

I generally don't care for Libertarian politics or ideology, but after reading several references to the book I decided to check it out for myself. I'm happy I did. The author talks about a lot of things that are easy to forget under the constant barrage of dysfunctional, mass African-American, "new-school" culture.

Mr. Browne talks about what he calls "the despair trap" versus "the general market." My comments are in blue:

"The Despair Trap is the belief that other people can prevent you from being free. Despair isn't hard to come by. . . [i]f you've been trying to convince your friends and family to accept your way of life, you probably feel very misunderstood and unappreciated by now. [Khadija speaking: The unhappy reality is that the people around you who don't "get it" at this late date probably aren't going to make it as The Endless Night of Permanent Underclass Status For African-Americans becomes entrenched. Grieve for them---but not for too long. You have to keep it moving in order to survive and thrive!] How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World, Amazon Kindle Locations 1117-26.

Despite these kinds of problems, the goals of freedom and happiness are totally realistic. If they aren't being achieved, it's the method that's wrong, not the objective. [This is a critical point. There are so many vampires screaming at African-American women that it's somehow "wrong" for them to seek happiness and fulfillment. The vampires say this even though they are busy doing whatever they want to do. The vampires are typically NOT making the sacrifices that they demand of African-American women.]

You have to accept the world as it is. But that doesn't mean you should look at the people who oppose your ways and conclude that there's no chance to be free. The world includes much more than just the people you've been dealing with.

There are undoubtedly many, many people with whom you have nothing in common. But there are also plenty of people who see things in much the same way you do. If you haven't come in contact with them, it may be because you've unnecessarily confined yourself to those with whom you've been associating.

And it may be that you haven't discovered ways of finding the kinds of people who could add to your life, instead of detract from it. How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World, Amazon Kindle Locations 1126-35.

[It's impossible to overemphasize how VITAL it is for African-American women to STOP socializing in all-Black circles and settings. These are radioactve settings filled with degradation and spirit-breaking despair for any Black woman who goes there. I know that for many of us, these all-Black settings are all we know. And I know that many of us figure "better the devil we know."

I'm saying NO! The Damaged Beyond Repair (DBR) African-American males you encounter in all-Black settings are orders of magnitude WORSE than the general population of men in the outer world. Just open your eyes for a moment and look around. Look at how other ethnic and racial groups of men generally protect and provide for the women of their group. Look at how these other women and children are living. And then look at how totally unprotected African-American women and children are. I'll make it plain. At this point in time, things have deteriorated to the extent that: All-Black Settings = Death For Black Women. On many levels. Emotional death, spiritual death, and in ever-increasing numbers, physical death.]

The popular conventions of society might discourage you from breaking out of uncomfortable situations to find those people. Such hallowed traditions as one marriage, one career, one employer, staying in one place, etc., can cause you to feel that you must make the best of whatever situation you're already in.

But 'making the best' frequently means either giving up your own happiness or trying to change others. Neither way makes any sense.

You don't have to stay where you are. You can look for someone who doesn't have to be forced to love you, someone who will be enthusiastic about what you have to offer, someone who will help you get what you want because it will be in his self interest to do so.

You're in the Despair Trap if you believe that you have to stay where you are and work things out somehow. Or if you believe that you couldn't be any better off if you were to change your situation. Or if you think that the government or society can stop you from being free. How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World, Amazon Kindle Locations 1135-44 (emphasis added).

The General Market embraces personal relationships as well as commercial ones. All relationships are governed by market principles as individuals come together, exchange or share as appropriate, and work toward the advancement of their own happiness. The same principles apply to finding a friend that apply to finding a buyer for your product.

Within the General Market there's a whole world of potential relationships for you if you realize that you don't have to please everyone.

If you want a marriage partner who's compatible with your way of life, you don't have to prove to everyone that your way is right. You need to find only one person who meets your needs and who wants you as you are.

You don't need millions of friends; you only need enough to provide the companionship and shared interests you'd like to have. So it isn't important what the other people are like." How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World, Amazon Kindle Locations 1144-54 (emphasis added).

A Sojourner does not cast her pearls before swine. Instead, she finds and embraces the "market" that's best for her.

Are you seeking and embracing the market that's best for YOU?

Yet Another Emerging, DISASTROUS Social Trend: Normalizing Single Adoption As "Plan B" For Black Women Who Haven't Married By 35

2009-07-09T12:40:00.019-05:00

The Sojourner's Path: Reject False Egalitarianism And Cultivate Your SUPERIOR Traits

2009-07-07T16:41:00.025-05:00

LIFE IS NOT FAIR OR EQUAL -- Everything And Everybody Are NOT The Same

The first thing that aspiring Sojourners must understand is that real life is not fair or equal. In fact, life is filled with naturally-occurring, lopsided ratios! In order to survive and thrive, we must position ourselves on the WINNING side of these ratios.

From The 80/20 Principle: The Secret to Achieving More with Less, by Richard Koch. My comments are in blue:

"The reason that the 80/20 Principle is so valuable is that it is counterintuitive. We tend to expect that all causes will have roughly the same significance. That all customers are equally valuable. That every bit of business, every product, and every dollar of sales revenue is as good as any other. That all employees in a particular category have roughly equivalent value. That each day or week or year we spend has the same significance. That all our friends have roughly equal value to us.

[Khadija speaking: African-Americans love to believe that "everybody's the same." And that "everything is the same," and that "things aren't any different in other places." This sort of thinking leads to our angry (really deranged) assertions that out of wedlock parenting is "equal" to married parenting. That a child having a "weekend only, telephone father" is "equal" to having an onsite 24/7 father who is married to one's mother. Well. . . umm. . . NO. This is not how real life operates. Not at all. Real life is filled with HUGE, natural imbalances. Real life tends to follow Pareto's Law.]

. . . That all problems have a large number of causes, so that it is not worth isolating a few key causes. [Oh, let's stop here for a moment. This is a critical point. This is a large part of why African-Americans love to believe that people are the same. This notion serves to obscure the TRUE source of many of the problems among us. These "people are basically the same" and "we're all equally responsible" delusions provide cover for those among us who are truly aberrant.

If we sought to isolate the primary causes of certain problems during our analyses, it would put an extremely unflattering spotlight on some of our cultural "sacred cows." Sacred cows such as the Black underclass, and the "young Black males" that we refer to in our political slogans.]

That all opportunities are of roughly equal value, so that we treat them all equally." The 80/20 Principle: The Secret to Achieving More with Less, by Richard Koch. Amazon Kindle Locations 203-14 (emphasis added).

Pareto's Law

From The 4-Hour Workweek: Escape 9-5, Live Anywhere, and Join the New Rich, by Timothy Ferriss:

"Pareto's Law can be summarized as follows: 80% of the outputs result from 20% of the inputs. Alternative ways to phrase this, depending on the context, include:

80% of the consequences flow from 20% of the causes.

80% of the results come from 20% of the effort and time. [African-American women spend the bulk of their efforts on things and people that have the LEAST amount of impact. This is why we work so hard for so little. This misuse of effort and time applies to many situations.]

80% of the company profits come from 20% of the products and customers.

. . . The list is infinitely long and diverse, and the ratio is often skewed even more severely: 90/10, 95/5, and 99/1 are not uncommon, but the minimum ratio to seek is 80/20." The 4-Hour Workweek: Escape 9-5, Live Anywhere, and Join the New Rich, by Timothy Ferriss, Amazon Kindle Locations 940-52 through952-62 (emphasis added).

[Yes, I agree that in real life the ratio is often extremely skewed---95/5 and 99/1. Real life has a lot of "winner take all" scenarios. For example, in terms of income, there are many fields where a few "superstars" within the field earn millions, and those ranked just beneath them (in terms of reputation) make only a comfortable living. Think of the likely difference in earnings between the author of the Harry Potter books and authors who are in the next lower tier of sales. Real life has MANY "winner take all" types of situations!]

People Are Usually Shocked When They Open Their Eyes To This

"The 80/20 Principle also asserts that when we know the true relationship, we are likely to be surprised at how unbalanced it is. Whatever the actual level of imbalance, it is likely to exceed our prior estimates. . . Teachers may know that the majority of their disciplinary troubles or most truancy arises from a minority of pupils, but if records are analyzed the extent of the imbalance will probably be larger than expected. We may feel that some of our time is more valuable than the rest, but if we measure inputs and outputs the disparity can still stun us.

Why should you care about the 80/20 Principle? Whether you realize it or not, the principle applies to your life, to your social world, and to the place where you work. Understanding the 80/20 Principle gives you great insight into what is really happening in the world around you." The 80/20 Principle: The Secret to Achieving More with Less, by Richard Koch. Amazon Kindle Locations 214-24 through 224-35.

Real Life Also Has Many Feedback Loops And Sensitive Dependence On Initial Conditions

Real life also has many positive and negative feedback loops. The rich get richer; the poor get poorer. Furthermore, real life is often extremely sensitive to initial conditions. This means that even small advantages or disadvantages at the beginning of a process can have a huge impact on end results. Think of it as similar to a ship navigating its course with a compass. If the the course chosen is off by only a few degrees at the beginning, it will be off by many miles the further it sails.

We see many examples of this in everyday life. Those of us with common sense know that a good beginning for our children's lives dramatically increases the odds of their future success. Shrewd women know that how they begin an interaction with a man will impact the entire relationship.

WHAT ALL OF THIS MEANS FOR AFRICAN-AMERICAN WOMEN
1. Stop Pretending That These Ratios Don't Exist

No matter how much African-Americans weep, wail, and gnash our teeth, these skewed ratios will continue to dominate real life. Nature is filled with imbalances. Everybody is NOT the same. In any field, by any measure, there are only a FEW outstanding people. Whatever "it" is, there will be a sea of relative mediocrity with only a handful of standouts in either direction (good or bad).

A critical point about this angle is to look at what a group's "baseline" is. A group's collective baseline is how you measure that group's general success or failure. Some collective baselines are MUCH higher than others. There's the mediocrity of being a lower-middle class person when your ethnic group is mostly affluent. [Oh, you can probably guess which ethnic/religious group I'm thinking of.] And then there's the mediocrity of being a poor, fatherless, African-American person who was born out of wedlock. If the odds are that you'll be mediocre, would you rather be "mediocre" in the sense of the first group or "mediocre" in the second group?

Most African-Americans resist the reality of these ratios because we're used to being on the losing side of these numbers. In fact, we've embraced a collective "loser" identity.

It never occurs to us that we have it within us to be SUPERIOR regarding anything that matters. It never occurs to us that we can be on the winning side of these ratios.

So, we have a mindset of trying to pretend that everything and everybody is the same. Pretending that everybody's "equal." So, we have a mindset of trying to coerce the "winners" into giving the "losers" (that would be us) large slices of their "pies." We want to try to force situations into an artificial, false veneer of "equality."

This is only a temporary solution to disparities and inequalities. It will always fail in the long-run because these ratios will always exist. And unless a group raises its collective "baseline," they will always be disadvantaged relative to others. They will continue to lose. Not only have African-Americans failed to raise our collective baseline, but we've allowed it to plummet.

Over the past few decades we've started saying things like "BMW = Black Man Working." What do these sorts of expressions say to the world about our baseline? Our collective's baseline is currently at ground level. And it will fall through the floor once the Endless Night of Permanent Underclass Status becomes entrenched.

2. Understand That "Equality Talk" Is A Subtle Trap

Equality talk is actually a subtle mental trap. If you really believe that "things aren't any better anywhere else," then you have no incentive to move anywhere to seek a better living environment. If you really believe that you're "the same" as everybody else, then you're not going to cultivate those traits of yours that are actually superior to the masses. And so on across the board.

All of this stems from embracing a mass loser self-identity. Equality talk is usually heard coming from losers who are trying to convince themselves that they have some merit. Winners don't talk that equality talk. Now, gracious winners might publicly engage in equality talk so as to not upset the losers around them; but that equality stuff is NOT their self-image. People who are winning feel that they have superior skills or traits that enable them to win. Losers feel that they were lucky to win.

3. Use These Ratios To YOUR Advantage. Embrace And Cultivate Your SUPERIOR Traits!

I often praise God for my parents. In terms of raising us, they were NOT for that false equality mess. Egalitarianism was not for their children. They never wanted us to be "equal" with anybody. They wanted our points of SUPERIORITY to shine brightly!

Ladies, stop thinking like losers who have to scramble for scraps! You can position yourself to be a winner who takes all! This applies across the board. From one's personal life to one's financial life. Keep in mind the fact that some people actually made a LOT of money during the Great Depression.

There are general things about us as Black women that are actually SUPERIOR to other women. You already know many of these traits, but somehow most of you don't take these things to heart and work with them to your advantage. I don't understand this behavior.

This includes surface beauty traits. You know that we generally age better than other women. You know that our complexions usually have a glow and vitality that others admire. You really KNOW that other people admire our curves! Non-Blacks have noticed and commented on all of this. Why don't YOU seem to know this? Why don't you cultivate these advantages?

[I know. . . Lord, I know it angers some of you, but I'm going to ask: Why persist in hiding your God-given curves under extra weight? I never said that it was easy. Don't you remember me complaining and whining every step of the way during the workout check-in posts? I'm still complaining about being sore, tired, etc. I complain, but I keep working out.]

This includes inner beauty traits. Generally speaking, African-American women are resourceful. We are industrious. We are intensely loyal. The problem is that we've got all of these traits harnessed in support of unworthy causes, goals and people.

There are specific things about YOU as an individual that are SUPERIOR to most others. Are you ready to embrace and cultivate your superior traits? Are you ready to be a winner who takes all?

The Sojourner's Path: Active Instead of Passive Living

2009-07-06T00:11:00.009-05:00

Let's talk some more about personal transformation, and practical steps toward living out our Wildest Dreams. I've been reading a fascinating book titled How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World by a Libertarian ideologue named Harry Browne. The book can be found at http://www.trendsaction.com/

I generally don't care for Libertarian politics or ideology, but after reading several references to the book I decided to check it out for myself. I'm happy I did. The author talks about a lot of things that are easy to forget under the unquestioned routines of everyday life. And that's not even factoring in the learned helplessness that has become a large part of mass African-American, "new-school" culture.

It occurs to me that so many Black women have been indoctrinated into being what has been termed self-sacrificing "gravediggers," that it might be helpful to repeat and discuss some of these ideas here (my comments are in blue). Mr. Browne said:

"I've been told so many times that freedom is just a fantasy, that you can't live that way in the real world, that there are too many daily commitments that have to be met, that in real life things are much too complicated to be able to do what you want and to enjoy yourself.

But who made your life complicated?

You did, of course. It wasn't society, the economic system, the people you consider to be nuisances, your parents, or anyone else.

Every complication in your life today is the result of something you've allowed to happen. You initiated it, or you consented to it, or you've allowed it to continue. You are where you are today because you've chosen to be there. And you can choose not to be there. [Khadija speaking: This idea is often a bitter pill to swallow. It's emotionally so much more comfortable to totally blame others. The problem with blaming others is that it means ceding control over your life's possibilities to these other people!]

You'll have to pay for past mistakes, but no mistake warrants a life sentence. You can telescope those payments into the short term and get rid of them quickly. [There's no need to accept any sort of life sentence. Even those prisoners with life sentences don't accept them. They're busy writing to volunteer groups trying to get their convictions overturned! Why should we be any less resourceful?]

You can get rid of bad relationships, meaningless obligations, negative commitments. You can do anything you want. You're free ---- if only you'll realize it. Only you can choose to make things better for yourself. You can decide to stop 'going along' with things that are handed to you. You can decide to live your life as the free person you are.

Don't tell me that it can't be done. There are too many people who've already done it.

No matter where you are now, you can unravel all the knots that you've woven into your life. [This doesn't mean that it'll be easy; but it can be done.] You can decide to be free. No one else has to be convinced ---- it requires only your decision and action." [Hear, hear!] Amazon Kindle locations 3831-41 through 3841-50 (emphasis added).

Mr. Browne talks about the various measures one can use to assess how you're spending the bulk of your time. One measure is whether your activities are active or passive:

"3. Active-Passive Labels. This approach is similar to the last one. It will help you to see if you're making things happen in your life ---- or if you're just going along with what others want. Label each activity active or passive. The active label applies to anything you have initiated, the things you do because you have decided they should be done. The passive label should be attached to those activities you do because someone else wants you to do them. [Which is the "gravedigger's" self-selected lot in life.]

. . . As you apply these labels to your weekly activities, designate passive those things you do only to preserve a relationship (even if it's a relationship you value) --- such things as conversations that bore you, favors, etc. As you look at the labels, you can see how much of your time is necessary to preserve the relationship ---- and that should tell you if the situation is as compatible as you'd thought it was. [Yes, when looked at this way, it's possible to discover that many situations we involve ourselves in are actually not compatible with our interests, values or aspirations.]

Look for relationships that don't require that you tolerate unpleasant things in order to maintain them. With the right people, you should be spending most (if not all) of your time doing things that please you, that make sense to you ---- the things you want to do. Compromises seem necessary only because of inappropriate situations. If you're involved with the right people, the word 'sacrifice' shouldn't even be in your vocabulary."

[This is somewhat extreme for my tastes. I'm willing to make non-catastrophic (and usually small) sacrifices for those I value. Although, once I consciously thought about it, I realized that I'm willing to do this about 15-17% of the time. To me, having to do stuff that you find unpleasant (but the other person actually likes) 20% or more of the time means that you're not like-minded enough to have a mutually enjoyable friendship, etc. with the person.] Amazon Kindle locations 3761-72 through 3772-81 (emphasis added).

Another thing I've noticed is that so many African-American women are literally afraid to explore activities that genuinely interest them, unless these activities are also popular with the masses of African-Americans. This is a crazy way to live. You miss out on a lot of things like that. You also miss out on meeting other Black folks who happen to share your interests.

[My ex, who is also interested in martial arts, talked about how I was the only Black woman he knew who took martial arts classes. (He's African-American.) I've heard similar comments from others. Which is strange on a practical level---considering how much physical danger African-American women are subjected to on a daily basis in Black residential areas.

Since I brought this up, let me stress the following: One of the first things you notice in martial arts classes with guy partners is just how physically strong guys are. Even the smaller men. So, be advised that Buffy The Vampire Slayer is pure fantasy. Not to mention that many predators work out every day while they are in prison. No normal person who takes time to work for a living can match that prison-level of physical conditioning. Normal people also generally can't match the "I've got nothing to lose" mindset of many ex-cons. Normal people have things that they care about, including their own lives. However, it's still possible for even small women to learn practical skills like how to get out of, and away from, various types of grabs and holds.]

This active-passive test is a good one for taking stock of one's daily life and the people in one's life. It's a good way to see if you're in a state of true fellowship with the people around you. This matters.

In fact, during the emerging Endless Night of Permanent Underclass Status For African-Americans, this will be a matter of life and death for Black women.

WHY THIS WILL SOON BE A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH

It's all connected. The extreme isolation of so many Black women's lives is a recurring theme and underlying factor in so many of the problems we collectively face. It's one of the reasons I've been so agitated about Black folks' prospects in the current economic crisis. During the First Great Depression we at least had strong family and community ties for mutual support. With a majority out of wedlock rate, there aren't many strong families. These women and children have NO male protectors and providers. Black residential areas have long since stopped functioning as communities. During this current crisis, many Black women literally have nobody to watch their backs.

This means that when something goes wrong, these women and their children are likely to end up in the condition that Min. Farrakhan has described as "naked, hungry, and out of doors."

Part of the reason for this is because many African-American women are investing the bulk of their energy into non-reciprocal relationships with people who must be appeased with these women's service. If these people only come around or interact with you when they want something, what happens when you have nothing to give? Answer: Silence and apathy while you transition into being "naked, hungry, and out of doors."

This is why it's important to build true, reciprocal fellowships with as many people as possible. The odds of having that sort of relationship are increased if the relationship is built around genuinely shared interests and values. You're more likely to meet people who share your interests and values when you actively pursue your genuine interests. Instead of only participating in activities that are "approved of" by mass, popular Black culture.

For further reading, see True Fellowship, Part 2: Breaking Bread. http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2008/10/true-fellowship-part-2-breaking-bread.html

Don't Miss Out On Marriage Due To Fighting A Cultural War That Black Men Abandoned Over 40 Years Ago

2009-07-05T08:54:00.037-05:00

Open Panel Discussion: Let's Talk About Leadership, And Where Do We Go From Here With Black Women's Empowerment Activism?

2009-07-03T20:21:00.008-05:00

These topics have come up during a recent blog discussion. I feel that they are deserving of a separate open-panel discussion of their own. So, please feel free to add your thoughts.

Here are my thoughts about this:

I feel that African-American women (AAW) don't need "leaders" in this context. We need consciousness-raising. We need to learn how to have minds that are open enough to re-think what we've been doing.

The life-saving, life-enhancing ideas that various Black women empowerment bloggers have been discussing are really quite simple, and founded on common sense. All that's required to put them into use is a willingness to reconsider some things, and change some self-defeating behaviors.

I'm somewhat confused by the mental resistance and the "stuck points" that some AAW seem to have with all of this. Especially with the weight issues---I just don't understand why seeking validation of the "pity party" is more important than life itself.

In my case, I took the time to re-examine my ideology (and what I was doing) shortly after I was presented with new information (the Dunbar Village Atrocity & Aftermath, various blog essays, etc.). After reviewing all the new ideas and new information I had come across, I decided to change course. It was painful, and I grieved over the loss of the previous ideas I had found certainty in. But I'm better off for it.

It's one thing to carefully consider new ideas or information and THEN reject them after thinking it over. It's something else to keep going around a mental "spin cycle" with the same stale thoughts---as if one had never seen or heard the new information. I don't understand that sort of behavior. Especially when the status quo is NOT doing anything positive for a person.

I think that our people's previous models of "leadership" are obsolete and frankly, unworkable in our particular context. [For a variety of reasons that we can discuss in greater detail, if anyone is interested.] In terms of our empowerment/consciousness-raising activism, I think what would be best is an "open source" model of activism.

Here are some links that explain the ideas behind "open source" warfare, etc.

www.pastpeak.com/archives/2006/01/global_guerrill.htm

http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/robb_opensource_war.htm

The Last Embers Of A Dying Flame: Will YOU Make It Out Before Darkness Falls?

2009-07-02T18:28:00.015-05:00

The Sojourner-Artist: Have More Than One Iron In The Fire

2009-07-02T12:30:00.007-05:00

I recently read the following blog post from a literary agent: http://bookendslitagency.blogspot.com/2009/06/more-thoughts-on-re-pitching-agents.html Among other things, she said: "I’ve always taught that if you have made significant changes to your book for one reason or another you should definitely consider re-pitching agents. " However, she added that she often worries about how pleased many aspiring authors are to hear this particular suggestion. She went on to say:

"I will tell you right now, if you don’t learn to move on, to write the next book and query the next book and write and query the next book after that you will never be published.

No agent and no publisher wants an author for only one book, and if you spend years reworking and re-pitching that same book you’re not making yourself a very marketable or publishable author." (emphasis added)

Even though I groaned when I read this last part (after all, it's HARD work to write just ONE book), it does make sense. People in general are accustomed to perceiving their goals in a "gonna fly now-Rocky" context of the one prize fight, the one hit song, or the one blockbuster novel that will propel them to the top of their field. Very few people contemplate the sustained effort it takes to create a body of work.

So, what does this mean to me? It means that after I finish the first draft of my novel, I'll set it aside for a while and write some short stories that I can enter into writing competitions. And then I'll start my second novel after I finish revising the first one. Onward and forward.

In most contexts, it's not good to depend upon one thing. This has been noted throughout the ages. As Baltasar Gracian said in his 1637 book, The Art of Worldly Wisdom:

"Double Your Resources. You thereby double your life. One must not depend on one thing or trust to only one resource, however preeminent. Everything should be kept double, especially the causes of success, of favor, or of esteem. . . Thus as nature gives us in duplicate the most important of our limbs and those most exposed to risk, so art should deal with the qualities on which we depend for success." The Art of Worldly Wisdom, pg. 54.

Tools For The Writer's/Filmmaker's Craft: "Selling Your Story In 60 Seconds"

2009-07-01T08:22:00.008-05:00

I'm reading an extremely helpful book for the budding storyteller: Selling Your Story In 60 Seconds by Michael Hauge. http://www.amazon.com/Selling-Your-Story-Seconds-Guaranteed/dp/1932907203/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1246419408&sr=1-1

As he points out, "If you're a writer or filmmaker who wants to connect with an audience, who wants to touch as many people as you can with your work, you must devote time and energy to the marketing process, just as you do to your craft. . . You've got to get your work read, which means you've got to put yourself out there in a positive, committed way and make people aware of your talent." pg. xxi.

This principle applies to more than the arts. It also applies to entrepreneurship in general. From what I've seen and read, one of the main causes of small business failure is the lack of a (sound) marketing strategy. People fall in love with their product or service without giving a single thought to the question, "How am I going to sell this?" It seems to me that it's best to think of the marketing aspect from the very beginning.

I also agree with the author that you only have a short amount of time to make a successful initial pitch. People settle into a general attitude about things or ideas fairly quickly. I've seen this with juries.

As I mentioned in an earlier post:

"Most of the current work created by African-American women promotes the status quo ENTRAPMENT of African-American women and girls. Often, those few works that promote the freedom of movement of an individual Black female author have the negative side effect of blocking the path for others. We need Sojourner-Artists. We need art that promotes and protects the Sojourner's Path by showing the possibilities that are available for African-American women and girls. We need art that encourages African-American women and girls to seize these possibilities." http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/05/sojourner-as-artist-extended-readers.html

If we are going to have the African-American Women's Arts Movement that we desperately need, then we have to be at the top of our game as Sojourner-Artists.

Read, learn, and Get Busy!

A Standing Ovation For Faith's Latest Blog Post

2009-06-28T13:01:00.010-05:00

Praise God, we're at a point where it's all coming together. Clarity is spreading throughout our ranks. Faith, the blog host of Acts of Faith In Love And Life (which is on my sidebar blogroll), has really brought it ALL together in her latest post. Ladies, I strongly urge you to read it:

http://actsoffaithinloveandlife.blogspot.com/2009/06/toure-trying-to-pull-perez-hilton.html

I'm not involved in the Obama-ssiah worship that most of us have succumbed to. I'm also not particularly interested in protecting Michelle Obama. I've never cared for either one of the Obamas. I have actively disliked him, and not cared much for her, from the very beginning of his political career here in Chicago.

My reaction to this hit piece is definitely not about Obama worship or protectionism. For me, this is about opposing the skin shade racism, and wanna-be classism underlying this hit piece. If Michelle Obama was light-skinned, these Negro (and White) bigots would NOT say many of the things they're saying. Faith breaks it all down and sums it all up in her post!

In addition to the above, the following quote from this Negro male's hit piece ticked me off as a native Black Chicagoan:

"Obama is more a man of the people,” says a Vineyarder who’s part of black high society. “He doesn’t seem to identify with affluent black people. His wife definitely doesn’t; she is basically a ghetto girl. That’s what she says—I’m just being sociological. She grew up in the same place Jennifer Hudson did. She hasn’t reached out to the social community of Washington, and people are waiting to see what they’ll do about that.”

Jennifer Hudson is from a southwest Chicago neighborhood called Englewood. Michelle Obama grew up in a southeast neighborhood called South Shore. Englewood is a poor African-American neighborhood. South Shore is a working class/middle class African-American neighborhood. Englewood is MILES away from South Shore. In geographical distance and in neighborhood quality of life. I know this because I grew up in South Shore. And I worked in a police station courtroom in Englewood. [For locals who are in the know, I worked there when Branch 49 was located in a police station-courtroom at 61st and Racine. That was back in the day! LOL!]

[For those who don't know, east-west is another axis of neighborhood division in Chicago in addition to the South Side-North Side axis.]

The anonymous person that this Negro claims to have quoted (I suspect that he made up the quote himself) is doing the same thing that the racist local Chicago media do---conflating these two very different neighborhoods into one giant slum. I hate that. I hate the way local tv news stations deliberately misreport every crime that takes place anywhere south of downtown as happening in "South Shore." They do this when the crimes are in OTHER neighborhoods that are literally MILES away from South Shore.

In the case of the local, racist, White media, it makes me wonder what their ulterior motive is. Young, urban, professional Whites have been in the process of trying to gentrify South Shore for several years now.

And while I'm doing my Chicago-centric rant, let me also point out that South Side does NOT equal poor/slum/ghetto. The Hyde Park neighborhood (where the University of Chicago is located) is on the South Side of Chicago. Several historical Black middle class neighborhoods (such as South Shore, "Pill Hill"---so nicknamed because many Black doctors lived there---and Chatham) are located on the South Side of Chicago.

The foul underpinning of this one small quote is a microcosm of what's wrong with the whole hit piece.

Here's a round of applause and a standing ovation for Faith!

An Open Letter To African-American Women Who PUBLICLY State That They Would Never Date/Marry Outside Their Race

2009-06-25T18:28:00.016-05:00

A Heartfelt And Public "Thank You" To Evia For Her Latest Blog Post

2009-06-23T20:26:00.007-05:00

As regular readers know, I'm a firm believer in the importance of thankfulness; and expressing gratitude to those who have helped us along our paths. I just stopped by Evia's blog, and I was truly touched by her latest blog post. Ladies, I strongly urge you to read it also. http://www.blackfemaleinterracialmarriage.com/2009/06/living-well-notes-clarification.html

Anyway, what struck me while reading this post was how much my quality of life improved as a result of pondering her essays, and those of other pioneer Black female empowerment bloggers.

One of God's blessings is that He often makes it easy to forget negative circumstances after they have improved. It's a blessing that memories fade. While reading, I was shocked to realize how much stress and strain was lifted off of me after I stopped assuming the responsibility for "saving alla our people." I had forgotten how stressful all of that was.

I used to be the type of African-American woman who was preoccupied with "saving alla our people." What I didn't realize while I was still in my Black Nationalist trance was that "saving alla our people" is a MAN'S role. It's not my function as a woman to rescue men and the community at large. It didn't occur to me that to even make such an attempt was totally out of divine order, with a price to pay as a consequence of being out of order.

After I let go of that "save alla our people" trickbag, I discovered how it's so much more pleasant for a woman to live and function as . . . a . . . woman. As opposed to trying to carry burdens that should be carried by men.

Enjoying the pleasures of the feminine role became my new "norm," and I had totally forgotten how much stress was lifted off of me as a result of thinking about the points Evia and other pioneers raised. Memories fade.

Memories fade but, when reminded, my thankfulness does not. One of the most important lessons my parents taught me is to thank the people who help you. And to thank them again. And to pray for them whenever you remember what they did for you. I sent the following email to Evia. I'm repeating it here to publicly express my thanks for all of the work that she has done over the past few years.

"Hello there, Evia!

{excited waving}

This is just a note to say a loud and heartfelt "THANK YOU" for your latest post. I know how your essays helped me at a point of confusion a couple of years ago; and I know that your essays continue to help other disoriented AA women. May God bless you for your work.

I read through the notes you published and shook my head at the level of confusion that exists among so many of us. Like you said, in a minute these same confused AA women will be hating on the African women who don't have our general hangups about marrying WELL with whoever will do the best by them and their future children.

Your words really spoke to me because I used to be one of those "save alla our people" AA women. That is, until I snapped out of my trance a few years back. I've been amazed at how much mental stress and strain I eliminated from my life just by that one decision---the decision to no longer assume responsibility for the fate of our people. As you've said over and over again, that's a man's job. I'm still saddened as any normal human being would be by the atrocious news stories coming out of Black residential areas. But the stories don't linger on my heart or mind anymore.

I'm free of all that. I always had the option to be free of all that. Previously, I was just too confused to see or exercise the option to be free.

I can't thank you and the other pioneers enough for helping me see all of this. Again, THANK YOU and may God bless you and yours!

Peace and blessings,
Khadija"

Geostrategy Nerd: Americans' Hypocritical Hand-Wringing About Iran's Recent Election

2009-06-23T19:26:00.012-05:00

I'm always pleased when somebody speaks the unspoken truth. A blogger named Driftglass pretty much summed it up here: http://driftglass.blogspot.com/2009/06/recount.html It's interesting to note the contrast between the many Iranians who are willing to risk their lives over having their votes counted versus the many American "sheeple" who passively allowed former Pres. Bush and the unelected "Supremes" to steal at least one election.

*Addendum: I ran across another interesting analysis of the situation. I'll post the links here as I come across them.

http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insightb/articles/eav062209.shtml

**2nd Addendum: Here's an example of why we must be extremely cautious of the "mainstream media." The headline to this New York Times story says "Arab States Aligned With U.S. Savor Turmoil in Iran." If they were honest the headline would say "Arab Dictatorships Aligned With U.S. Savor Turmoil in Iran," because that's what these U.S.-aligned states are. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/25/world/middleeast/25arabs.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

The "news" story is careful to only hint at this fact in the last couple of paragraphs when it says:

"The Arab world is ruled by authoritarian leaders, kings and emirs — and its greatest challenge to legitimacy and control is political Islamic movements like the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Jordan.

'Opponents of the Islamist movement go far in anticipating the collapse of the Islamic revolution and the end of the Islamist movements and their political project,' said Mohammad Abu Rumman, research editor at the newspaper Al Ghad in Amman. 'Anticipating the failure of the revolution is an anticipation of the failure of political Islam in general.'"

The story is careful to NOT make the connection between these "authoritarian leaders" and the "Arab states aligned with the U.S." It's careful to not point out that these are the same states.

This points out the nuances that those who support justice must keep in mind.

Weakening the brutal, authoritarian Iranian regime also means weakening the only Middle Eastern government that is strong enough to be completely independent of U.S. hegemony. And weakening the only Middle Eastern government that has actively and openly supported the Palestinians' and Lebanese struggles against Israeli aggression and occupation.

In the short-term context, more justice for the Iranian people = less justice for the Palestinians, Lebanese, and others who are directly suffering under Israeli oppression. I don't know what the best balancing of interests is in this situation. I just know that I haven't heard these nuances discussed. Not even among "progressives."

Geostrategy Nerd--Republished From STRATFOR: "The Iranian Election and the Revolution Test"

2009-06-22T21:49:00.016-05:00

Frankly, I don't know enough about Iranian society to have any substantive opinions about the current election-related unrest in that country. I can't tell if the unrest has widespread support or if it simply reflects the frustrations of a small, Westernized "yuppie" demographic. I'm suspicious when I see people waving protest signs written in English in a non-English-speaking country. Particularly countries where a totally different alphabet is used for the native language. I always wonder, "What sort of person in this country can read and write in English?" Probably someone who does NOT reflect a random cross-section of the country.

I will say this: Americans in general (and African-Americans in particular) need to learn to become more discerning about the "news" emanating from the so-called mainstream media. We also need to read from a wide variety of news sources that have different editorial postures. In that spirit, I'm republishing an article from STRATFOR. Again, I don't know enough to have an opinion about current events in Iran; and I don't necessarily buy into Stratfor's analysis. However, I do feel that the articles from Stratfor are a good antidote to the uncritical, breathless coverage that passes for mainstream "news" about these events.

Strategic Forecasting, Inc., more commonly known as Stratfor, is a private intelligence agency founded in 1996 in Austin, Texas. Barron's once referred to it as "The Shadow CIA". George Friedman is the founder, chief intelligence officer, and CEO of the company. The following article is from http://www.stratfor.com/

"The Iranian Election and the Revolution Test
June 22, 2009

By George Friedman

Successful revolutions have three phases. First, a strategically located single or limited segment of society begins vocally to express resentment, asserting itself in the streets of a major city, usually the capital. This segment is joined by other segments in the city and by segments elsewhere as the demonstration spreads to other cities and becomes more assertive, disruptive and potentially violent. As resistance to the regime spreads, the regime deploys its military and security forces. These forces, drawn from resisting social segments and isolated from the rest of society, turn on the regime, and stop following the regime’s orders. This is what happened to the Shah of Iran in 1979; it is also what happened in Russia in 1917 or in Romania in 1989.

Revolutions fail when no one joins the initial segment, meaning the initial demonstrators are the ones who find themselves socially isolated. When the demonstrations do not spread to other cities, the demonstrations either peter out or the regime brings in the security and military forces — who remain loyal to the regime and frequently personally hostile to the demonstrators — and use force to suppress the rising to the extent necessary. This is what happened in Tiananmen Square in China: The students who rose up were not joined by others. Military forces who were not only loyal to the regime but hostile to the students were brought in, and the students were crushed.

A Question of Support

This is also what happened in Iran this week. The global media, obsessively focused on the initial demonstrators — who were supporters of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s opponents — failed to notice that while large, the demonstrations primarily consisted of the same type of people demonstrating. Amid the breathless reporting on the demonstrations, reporters failed to notice that the uprising was not spreading to other classes and to other areas. In constantly interviewing English-speaking demonstrators, they failed to note just how many of the demonstrators spoke English and had smartphones. The media thus did not recognize these as the signs of a failing revolution.

Later, when Ayatollah Ali Khamenei spoke Friday and called out the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, they failed to understand that the troops — definitely not drawn from what we might call the “Twittering classes,” would remain loyal to the regime for ideological and social reasons. The troops had about as much sympathy for the demonstrators as a small-town boy from Alabama might have for a Harvard postdoc. Failing to understand the social tensions in Iran, the reporters deluded themselves into thinking they were witnessing a general uprising. But this was not St. Petersburg in 1917 or Bucharest in 1989 — it was Tiananmen Square.

In the global discussion last week outside Iran, there was a great deal of confusion about basic facts. For example, it is said that the urban-rural distinction in Iran is not critical any longer because according to the United Nations, 68 percent of Iranians are urbanized. This is an important point because it implies Iran is homogeneous and the demonstrators representative of the country.

The problem is the Iranian definition of urban — and this is quite common around the world — includes very small communities (some with only a few thousand people) as “urban.” But the social difference between someone living in a town with 10,000 people and someone living in Tehran is the difference between someone living in Bastrop, Texas and someone living in New York. We can assure you that that difference is not only vast, but that most of the good people of Bastrop and the fine people of New York would probably not see the world the same way. The failure to understand the dramatic diversity of Iranian society led observers to assume that students at Iran’s elite university somehow spoke for the rest of the country.

Tehran proper has about 8 million inhabitants; its suburbs bring it to about 13 million people out of Iran’s total population of 70.5 million. Tehran accounts for about 20 percent of Iran, but as we know, the cab driver and the construction worker are not socially linked to students at elite universities. There are six cities with populations between 1 million and 2.4 million people and 11 with populations of about 500,000. Including Tehran proper, 15.5 million people live in cities with more than 1 million and 19.7 million in cities greater than 500,000. Iran has 80 cities with more than 100,000. But given that Waco, Texas, has more than 100,000 people, inferences of social similarities between cities with 100,000 and 5 million are tenuous. And with metro Oklahoma City having more than a million people, it becomes plain that urbanization has many faces.

Winning the Election With or Without Fraud

We continue to believe two things: that vote fraud occurred, and that Ahmadinejad likely would have won without it. Very little direct evidence has emerged to establish vote fraud, but several things seem suspect.

For example, the speed of the vote count has been taken as a sign of fraud, as it should have been impossible to count votes that fast. The polls originally were to have closed at 7 p.m. local time, but voting hours were extended until 10 p.m. because of the number of voters in line. By 11:45 p.m. about 20 percent of the vote had been counted. By 5:20 a.m. the next day, with almost all votes counted, the election commission declared Ahmadinejad the winner. The vote count thus took about seven hours. (Remember there were no senators, congressmen, city council members or school board members being counted — just the presidential race.) Intriguingly, this is about the same time in took in 2005, though reformists that claimed fraud back then did not stress the counting time in their allegations.

The counting mechanism is simple: Iran has 47,000 voting stations, plus 14,000 roaming stations that travel from tiny village to tiny village, staying there for a short time before moving on. That creates 61,000 ballot boxes designed to receive roughly the same number of votes. That would mean that each station would have been counting about 500 ballots, or about 70 votes per hour. With counting beginning at 10 p.m., concluding seven hours later does not necessarily indicate fraud or anything else. The Iranian presidential election system is designed for simplicity: one race to count in one time zone, and all counting beginning at the same time in all regions, we would expect the numbers to come in a somewhat linear fashion as rural and urban voting patterns would balance each other out — explaining why voting percentages didn’t change much during the night.

It has been pointed out that some of the candidates didn’t even carry their own provinces or districts. We remember that Al Gore didn’t carry Tennessee in 2000. We also remember Ralph Nader, who also didn’t carry his home precinct in part because people didn’t want to spend their vote on someone unlikely to win — an effect probably felt by the two smaller candidates in the Iranian election.

That Mousavi didn’t carry his own province is more interesting. Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett writing in Politico make some interesting points on this. As an ethnic Azeri, it was assumed that Mousavi would carry his Azeri-named and -dominated home province. But they also point out that Ahmadinejad also speaks Azeri, and made multiple campaign appearances in the district. They also point out that Khamenei is Azeri. In sum, winning that district was by no means certain for Mousavi, so losing it does not automatically signal fraud. It raised suspicions, but by no means was a smoking gun.

We do not doubt that fraud occurred during Iranian election. For example, 99.4 percent of potential voters voted in Mazandaran province, a mostly secular area home to the shah’s family. Ahmadinejad carried the province by a 2.2 to 1 ratio. That is one heck of a turnout and level of support for a province that lost everything when the mullahs took over 30 years ago. But even if you take all of the suspect cases and added them together, it would not have changed the outcome.

The fact is that Ahmadinejad’s vote in 2009 was extremely close to his victory percentage in 2005. And while the Western media portrayed Ahmadinejad’s performance in the presidential debates ahead of the election as dismal, embarrassing and indicative of an imminent electoral defeat, many Iranians who viewed those debates — including some of the most hardcore Mousavi supporters — acknowledge that Ahmadinejad outperformed his opponents by a landslide.

Mousavi persuasively detailed his fraud claims Sunday, and they have yet to be rebutted. But if his claims of the extent of fraud were true, the protests should have spread rapidly by social segment and geography to the millions of people who even the central government asserts voted for him. Certainly, Mousavi supporters believed they would win the election based in part on highly flawed polls, and when they didn’t, they assumed they were robbed and took to the streets.

But critically, the protesters were not joined by any of the millions whose votes the protesters alleged were stolen. In a complete hijacking of the election by some 13 million votes by an extremely unpopular candidate, we would have expected to see the core of Mousavi’s supporters joined by others who had been disenfranchised. On last Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, when the demonstrations were at their height, the millions of Mousavi voters should have made their appearance. They didn’t. We might assume that the security apparatus intimidated some, but surely more than just the Tehran professional and student classes posses civic courage. While appearing large, the demonstrations actually comprised a small fraction of society.

Tensions Among the Political Elite

All of this not to say there are not tremendous tensions within the Iranian political elite. That no revolution broke out does not mean there isn’t a crisis in the political elite, particularly among the clerics. But that crisis does not cut the way Western common sense would have it. Many of Iran’s religious leaders see Ahmadinejad as hostile to their interests, as threatening their financial prerogatives, and as taking international risks they don’t want to take. Ahmadinejad’s political popularity in fact rests on his populist hostility to what he sees as the corruption of the clerics and their families and his strong stand on Iranian national security issues.

The clerics are divided among themselves, but many wanted to see Ahmadinejad lose to protect their own interests. Khamenei, the supreme leader, faced a difficult choice last Friday. He could demand a major recount or even new elections, or he could validate what happened. Khamenei speaks for a sizable chunk of the ruling elite, but also has had to rule by consensus among both clerical and non-clerical forces.

Many powerful clerics like Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani wanted Khamenei to reverse the election, and we suspect Khamenei wished he could have found a way to do it. But as the defender of the regime, he was afraid to. Mousavi supporters’ demonstrations would have been nothing compared to the firestorm among Ahmadinejad supporters — both voters and the security forces — had their candidate been denied. Khamenei wasn’t going to flirt with disaster, so he endorsed the outcome.

The Western media misunderstood this because they didn’t understand that Ahmadinejad does not speak for the clerics but against them , that many of the clerics were working for his defeat, and that Ahmadinejad has enormous pull in the country’s security apparatus. The reason Western media missed this is because they bought into the concept of the stolen election, therefore failing to see Ahmadinejad’s support and the widespread dissatisfaction with the old clerical elite. The Western media simply didn’t understand that the most traditional and pious segments of Iranian society support Ahmadinejad because he opposes the old ruling elite. Instead, they assumed this was like Prague or Budapest in 1989, with a broad-based uprising in favor of liberalism against an unpopular regime.

Tehran in 2009, however, was a struggle between two main factions, both of which supported the Islamic republic as it was. There were the clerics, who have dominated the regime since 1979 and had grown wealthy in the process. And there was Ahmadinejad, who felt the ruling clerical elite had betrayed the revolution with their personal excesses. And there also was the small faction the BBC and CNN kept focusing on — the demonstrators in the streets who want to dramatically liberalize the Islamic republic. This faction never stood a chance of taking power, whether by election or revolution.

The two main factions used the third smaller faction in various ways, however. Ahmadinejad used it to make his case that the clerics who supported them, like Rafsanjani, would risk the revolution and play into the hands of the Americans and British to protect their own wealth. Meanwhile, Rafsanjani argued behind the scenes that the unrest was the tip of the iceberg, and that Ahmadinejad had to be replaced. Khamenei, an astute politician, examined the data and supported Ahmadinejad.

Now, as we saw after Tiananmen Square, we will see a reshuffling among the elite. Those who backed Mousavi will be on the defensive. By contrast, those who supported Ahmadinejad are in a powerful position. There is a massive crisis in the elite, but this crisis has nothing to do with liberalization: It has to do with power and prerogatives among the elite. Having been forced by the election and Khamenei to live with Ahmadinejad, some will make deals while some will fight — but Ahmadinejad is well-positioned to win this battle.

This report may be forwarded or republished on your website with attribution to http://www.stratfor.com/"

Another good site for in-depth coverage of the Middle East is Prof. Juan Cole's blog, Informed Comment at http://www.juancole.com/

Tools For The Writer's Craft: 2 Books & 2 Blogs

2009-06-18T17:12:00.006-05:00

I've been reading the following two books that I've found to be extremely helpful:

Break Into Fiction: 11 Steps to Building a Story That Sells, by Mary Buckham and Dianna Love. http://www.amazon.com/Break-Into-Fiction-Steps-Building/dp/1605500151 , and

How To Write Killer Fiction: The Funhouse of Mystery & The Roller Coaster of Suspense, by Carolyn Wheat. http://www.amazon.com/How-Write-Killer-Fiction-Funhouse/dp/1880284626/

Evia, blog host of Black Female Interracial Marriage Ezine, http://www.blackfemaleinterracialmarriage.com/ mentioned another excellent resource for writers in one of her comments:

http://nathanbransford.blogspot.com/2009/06/writing-advice-database.html The blog author Nathan Bransford (who is a literary agent) linked to another literary agent blog that has helpful articles. It's at http://bookendslitagency.blogspot.com/

Read, learn, and Get Busy!

Save Your Own Life: Fitness Matters In More Ways Than You Think

2009-06-14T22:21:00.006-05:00

Back when I still bought newspapers, I made a point of reading Mary Mitchell's columns. I've grown disenchanted with most print media over the past few years. I don't read the local papers anymore. I generally don't even read them online. Mary Mitchell came to mind recently, and I decided to see what she was up to at the Chicago Sun-Times. I ran across the following column: http://www.suntimes.com/news/mitchell/1602487,CST-NWS-mitch02.article

My goodness. I'm delighted that she's a survivor. But I'm also alarmed (yet again) at how so many African-American women are beset with various ailments. I recently mentioned to a friend how it feels like every time I turn around I hear of a Black female acquaintance who has been diagnosed with some condition.

I'm tired of hearing these things. We need to do better about protecting our health. Regular check-ups matter. Nutrition matters. Maintaining a healthy weight matters. Fitness matters. These things matter in more ways than most of us realize.

It's never too late. I talked about this in the first Wildest Dreams post ("Have Your Own 'Wildest Dreams' Tour, Part 1: Get Your College Body Back!")http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/01/have-your-own-wildest-dreams-tour-part.html

Anthony DiLuglio is a personal trainer who has produced a series of kettlebell exercise videos called The Art of Strength. I have one of his kettlebell workout videos. I was surprised to later learn that he was undergoing treatment for cancer while he was shooting the exercise video. http://aosvid.com/media/Surviving_full.pdf

He has also helped other cancer survivors: http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/03/27/his_path_to_recovery_paved_with_kettlebells/ I wasn't able to embed the video (I'm having some problems with Blogger), but it's worth watching the video that's part of the "Kettlebells and Cancer" section of this newsletter. http://www.artofstrength.com/MinuteofStrengthENews/MinuteofStrength116/tabid/730/Default.aspx

I haven't been talking much about my workouts since I finished the Wildest Dreams Check-In series of posts, but I'm still exercising. I hope you're getting your exercise too.

Twelve Factors For Determining If Your Church/Mosque Is Simply Unhealthy Or Downright Dangerous

2009-06-12T00:17:00.011-05:00

A blogger named Sara Robinson (who contributes to The Group News Blog, Orcinus, and OurFuture.org) has written many excellent articles detailing the rise of right-wing extremism. In this post, she discusses some of the criteria intelligence agencies use to determine if a group is simply crazy or on the road to domestic terrorism.

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/how-dangerous-flds

It's a good exercise to read the post and consider how our various houses of worship measure up according to these criteria.

Twelve Factors For Determining If Your Church/Mosque Is Simply Unhealthy Or Downright Dangerous

1. Marching Toward the Apocalypse
2. A Theology of Violence
3. The Chosen One
4. Goin' Up To The Country
5. Political Influence
6. Takin' Care of Business
7. Crimes of Intimidation
8. Increasingly violent rhetoric
9. Blaming the government
10. Intensification of illegal activities
11. Shaming the Leader
12. Blundering Authority

Home Is Where The Hate Is, Part 1: Black Religious-Inspired Bigotry In Place of Godliness

2009-06-11T09:47:00.025-05:00

I've been stunned into befuddled silence by the recent outbreaks of right-wing violence. From the assassination of a doctor who offered abortion services to the murder of a guard at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum.

I was even more stunned when I pondered how African-Americans' religious-inspired bigotry helps create the atmosphere that makes these slayings possible. We love to engage in hateful, hypocritical, bigoted talk.

Our fake "holiness talk" isn't about love of God. It's about the pleasure of cracking the whip on other people. We revel in verbally stepping on people who are engaged in sexual activities that we have no interest in participating in, such as the gays. Meanwhile, the majority of our births are out of wedlock. Despite all of our "We want forced births to be the law of the land" rhetoric, we are avid consumers of abortion services.

We are hateful bigots.

We are shameless hypocrites.

We are self-destructive fools.

By our bigoted statements and actions, we are ultimately supporting White, racist politicians who will turn back the clock on all of our (already extremely fragile) advancements.

This is what happened when many confused African-Americans voted for Pres. Bush to have a second term in office. I had many arguments with many confused Blacks who told me that they were voting for Bush because of so-called "moral issues" (translation: their opposition to gays having rights). Many of the Black folks saying these things were shacked up and had illegitimate children. [Translation: "By stepping on gays, I get to feel a rush of holiness without having to engage in any sort of self-discipline."] I noticed that some of this "moral issues" talk dried up after Pres. Bush did a "heckuva job" of ignoring the Black deaths and suffering caused by Hurricane Katrina.

By our bigoted statements and actions, we are ultimately supporting White, racist extremists who will turn their guns on US.

Even worse, I believe that our fake religiosity (which takes the form of bigoted statements and actions) is pushing us further and further away from God! The proof is in our ever-declining collective quality of life.

The Gaudy Carnival of Modern Black Fake Religiosity

All of this has brought to mind some earlier conversations that Pioneer Valley Woman has hosted at her excellent blog Episcopalienne (which is listed on my side blog roll). Through her blog, Pioneer Valley Woman is providing one of the few safe spaces where we can seriously discuss Black religious issues. Thank you, Pioneer Valley Woman!

As I've mentioned in other conversations, I've spent much of my career doing indigent defense (after barely tolerating working as a prosecutor---but that's a tale for another day). In addition to criminal rotations, I did rotations in my area's child welfare and child support courtrooms. It has been extremely eye-opening in many ways.

Friends at work and I have talked about our observations and we can't figure out if the patterns reflect class issues in terms of different denominations or church/mosque misleadership issues. I'm beginning to think that both class issues and religious misleadership are creating these patterns.

I apologize in advance to anyone that I inadvertently offend; but this is what we've seen in our large metropolitan area's criminal, delinquency, child welfare, and child support courtrooms:

The vast majority of the criminal, delinquency, and child-welfare defendants and child support litigants are African-Americans. No surprises there. Public aid requires female recipients to name the "baby daddies" involved in order to recoup some of the welfare money from these men. [Please note that my jurisdiction makes a distinction between child support in the context of divorce, and out-of-wedlock child support. Before the local legal aid society's federal lawsuit, the out of wedlock child support cases were heard in criminal courtrooms housed in police station complexes. There are still separate courtrooms in different types of buildings allocated for these two contexts.]

Among the Black defendants and child support litigants who claim any religious affiliation at all, the VAST majority of them seem to come from "sanctified," "holy roller" churches. Specifically, the Church of God in Christ (COGIC) is well-represented among the criminal defendant/out-of-wedlock child-support litigant population. My Black co-workers and I have seen VERY FEW Black Catholics, Lutherans, or Episcopalians over the years.

Over the years, I've listened to a lot of clients engage in a lot of talk (lip service) about "anointing," "spirits," etc. The COGIC clients often make a big show of being angry when my Black Christian colleagues won't "touch hands" and pray with them before court appearances. They hear my Muslim name upon introduction, and thankfully don't approach me with that "let's pray" stuff. One child welfare defendant/mother is still angry with her attorney (who, unknown to her, is also a COGIC member) because of this!

There is a large population of what I call "jailhouse" Muslims. The jailhouse Muslims typically have better Arabic pronunciation of religious expressions than me! A client explained to me that he accepted Islam in prison because he didn't have gang affiliations to protect him; and the prison Muslims will fight to defend each other from assault (similar to the protection offered by prison gang membership). From what I've seen, they claim Islam only while in prison. Once released, they get back to their previous (criminal) pursuits.

There is a small, but noticeable, subsection of Negro Muslims among the out of wedlock child support litigants. These are the foolish, usually hijab-wearing colored girls who call themselves involved in plural marriages. Of course, they are on welfare and their "husbands" dutifully collect the proceeds from these public aid checks.

These are the Negro Muslim male clients that I had the most heated exchanges with. I don't wear hijab, and some of these fools thought they were going to "check" me about that. They were shocked when I put them on blast about how it was impossible to distinguish their activities from those of a pimp and his stable of prostitutes.

A noticeable percentage of our Latino coworkers (attorneys and support staff) have become Protestants. Meanwhile, the Latino defendants retain at least nominal affiliation with the Catholic Church. These patterns only become noticeable when you see people in the huge volume that we do at work.

It Wasn't Always Like This

To further set the stage, let me describe the 2 main coworkers I've been discussing this with over the past few years:

Coworker #1 is a COGIC member in her early 50s. Her grandfather founded one of the largest and oldest COGIC churches in the area. She's horrified at all the "Let's pray for Sister So and So's son, who was just sentenced to 80 years!" appeals at her grandfather's church. It wasn't like this when she was growing up. She can't quite pinpoint when the congregation turned into a different sort of population. This is a source of great concern to her.

Coworker #2 is in her early 40s, is originally from a small Black town outside of Macon, Georgia (I can't quite imitate her Southern accent *Smile*), and grew up in the COGIC. Her father is a high-ranking official (bishop?) in the South, and her childhood was filled with attending tent-revivals. She joined the Episcopal church as an adult.

Both of these coworkers are true and sincere "church ladies" that I greatly admire and respect. They actually ARE what many of the clients like to pretend to be. Curiously, they don't run around using religious phrases like "I'm blessed and highly favored" etc. They actually practice their values by their actions. It's quite a contrast from the clients (and I may add some of our coworkers) whose lifestyles have no connection whatsoever to their overt "church jargon."

The same pattern applies to the jailhouse Muslims and other corrupt Muslims I've observed. Prison Muslims love to insert Arabic phrases and words into their speech. Even non-religious words like saying "akhi" instead of "brother."

It seems to me that the worst people are usually the ones who flamboyantly insert religious jargon and slogans into everyday conversations.

Anyway, Coworker #2 has noticed that there are a lot of West Indians and a sprinkling of Africans in her church. They seem to have "inherited" participation in these denominations from "back home." During an earlier conversation at her blog, Pioneer Valley Woman pointed out that class has some connection to all of this. I believe that she's right about this.

Most African-American Catholics, Lutherans, Episcopalians that I've met are middle class. And grew up in the middle class. However, I think there's something in addition to class and ethnic affiliations going on.

Coworker #2's church is one of the area's oldest Black Episcopal churches. It's located in the middle of what was the city's Black belt when Blacks of all classes were segregated together. The church's neighborhood is now mainly composed of poor African-Americans. Coworker #2's church members are very zealous and sincere in their efforts to assist and do outreach among the local poor residents. But the locals are not responding.

Let me be blunt: I think they're not responding based on their antipathy to: (1) serious church doctrine and (2) the emotional styles of these non-sanctified churches.

I haven't fully formed these thoughts, but here are my half-formed impressions from talking to my coworkers about this. One concern that I heard expressed with these storefront-type churches is the lack of accountability regarding doctrine. For all anybody knows, they could be preaching anything in these places. [In my uninformed opinion, the lack of firm doctrine in a lot of the majority-Black denominations has helped the spread of "prosperity ministries" in the Black community. My coworkers and I feel that these prosperity ministries have really damaged Black spirituality.]

I have no clue what the problem is within the COGIC. Coworker #1 says that it wasn't previously filled with the Black underclass. I can't tell if the problem is that COGIC members in other demographics migrated to other denominations, or what. I just don't know.

The other factor is that the client population is NOT attracted to the emotional climate in the non-"sanctified" denominations. To be candid: the Catholic, Lutheran, Episcopal churches are perceived as "too" cerebral by this population. Another attorney coworker who attends a storefront-type church explained to me point blank that "Black people want to be entertained in church." [!!!]

The client population can tolerate Islam (which is also "lacking" in entertainment value) because it offers physical perks---physical protection while one is in prison, and extra wives when one is out of prison.

It Doesn't Have To Be Like This

Something has gone horribly wrong in a lot of African-American houses of worship. We have more churches and mosques per capita than almost anybody else, and yet are collectively living worse than the people my grandmother used to call "heathens." From my vantage point, there is no longer any ethical center in the African-American community. This ethical core has been replaced with slogans: "I'm blessed & highly favored!" "Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah wa barakatullah!" [I won't bother to translate---since it's often (mostly?) insincere it doesn't matter what it "officially" means].

In Part 2 of this series, we'll talk about solutions.

Postscript to the "Racial Discipline" Discussion: Other Black Harvard Students WANT To Have A Future---Praise God!

2009-06-07T12:04:00.019-05:00

I'm happy to report an encouraging postscript to the news story that prompted the recent post titled "Reality Check: African-Americans STILL Need to Have Racial Discipline in the Obama Era." http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/05/reality-check-african-americans-still.html

Another blogger named Pinky (check her out at http://blackgirlsrockit.blogspot.com/) sent me the link to the news story "Why Black Harvard Won't Speak Up For Chanequa."

http://newsone.blackplanet.com/nation/why-black-harvard-won%E2%80%99t-speak-up-for-chanequa/

All I can say is "Praise God!" As one Black student who was interviewed said, "some of us still want to have a future." Pinky, thanks for sending me the story; it made my day!