Comments on the Million Man March

First of all it was the "Millions More March", which was a commemoration of sorts of the "Million Man March". Secondly, did you actually watch any of it? It was on C-SPAN all weekend. The march did not deal with excuses for black people in America. Issues discussed were ways to find affordable housing, calls for less adultery in the black community, and ways to repopulate areas hit hard by Katrina, among many other things. It was not about making excuses and blaming white people for their problems. It was about EMPOWERING THE COMMUNITY TO BETTER THEMSELVES. If not anything else, this was the major theme of the whole event. Now you may not like Farrahkan, Sharpton, Franklin, or their politics, but stories like this do not accomplish anything. It is obvious to anyone who watched the march or was actually there that this story is unfounded garbage and innuendo. It does nothing at all to improve race relations in this country, in fact, imo, it deepens the divide. Was the march perfect? No, of course not. Farrahkan did in fact blame the NO levees breaking on a government conspiracy, but on the whole it was a positive event. This is coming from someone who critically watched the entire event.

 

A magnitude of counting error is inexcusable.

If the person in question had not put out a contract on Malcolm X the black people might be "empowered."

 

Getting rid of rap music that degrades the rule of law and women and glorifies drug use and gangstas would also be a pleasant start.

 

Farrahkan marching for Civil rights? Isn't that kind of like David Duke forming a civil rights rally?

 

I believe it is well known that Farrahkan is a Muslim. Was that your point? As I said before people may not like Farrahkan, Sharpton, Jackson, or any other black liberal politician, but that does not change the fact the event was on the whole positive. It was about unifying the community and empowering them to better themselves. Getting an education, staying in monogamous relationships, buying homes-these were all major themes of the event. I think Christians could benefit from a similar gathering. By no means was the event perfect. By no means did I agree with everything that was said. I do believe it was a positive gathering though. It had nothing to do with making excuses for problems, but finding solutions to them.

 

"We charge America with criminal neglect ..."

I believe I already addressed this. When he made this comment he was specifically talking about a government conspiracy to break the levees in NO.

As to everything else...

Overall the march was positive. It was not about excuses. Did I agree with everything? No, of course not, but it was a positive movement. Why are people so alarmed that black people may actually unite to help themselves, not that the majority don't help themselves already?

 

It seemed very negative and racist to me. </font>[/QUOTE]Why? Because there are still hard feelings over slavery? Because a "buy black" speech was given? Because they acknowledge that the schools in poor neighborhoods are no where near as good as those of middle class neighborhoods, and they want to take the issue into their own hands instead of waiting for the government to do it? Is it because they want more African Americans to own labels and promote other black artists?

This is quite intriguing. Why is not discriminatory when Christians call for boycotts of companies or support of companies that support their agenda? Why isn't it discriminatory for Christians to create their own Christian schools? Why is not discriminatory for Christians to do everything in their power to prevent religious discrimination?

 

"Farrahkan did in fact blame the NO levees breaking on a government conspiracy,"------------------------------------------------------------

Not having heared of this event, and reading FP's post, I was sympothetic until I read that line. That is enough negative in that one sentence to flush any positive down the tolit.

You don't think buy black only campaigns are negative, racial, and counter productive?

It is so purely racial. The theme is the same old thing, ' the big white boogey man is going to get you. He would make a slave of you all today if he had a chance, so come under our unbrela and let us stay in charge. Don't venture out into the oportunities todays America offer's you, come to us"

 

It is so purely racial. The theme is the same old thing, ' the big white boogey man is going to get you. He would make a slave of you all today if he had a chance, so come under our unbrela and let us stay in charge. Don't venture out into the oportunities todays America offer's you, come to us"

I will give you the benefit of the doubt since you did not actually hear the speech and comments given at the march on this topic. It is not a "buy black" only campaign. The speech dealt with the failure of small businesses, especially black businesses due to the slowing economy. It was a speech meant to encourage African Americans to frequent businesses owned by other African Americans. It was speech aimed at the African American business leaders to contract work out to African American contractors. The language on the website that Dragoon posted is much more truncated than the actual speeches during the rally. (As would be the case, since it is a website).

Honestly I do not see this any differently than I do churches encouraging members to frequent Christian owned establishments. This is something I have seen a lot of in the last 6 months as I have visited many churches for "work" reasons, as well as fellowship. I do not think this is wrong. I think Christians should support other Christians who are struggling to make their business a success. I feel Christians should support Christian owen businesses that are already a success. I feel the same way about African Americans doing the same. I don't view it as religious discrimination or racial discrimination, but as supporting "your" community. As said, I don't agree with everything that was said at the rally, and most of what Farrahkan said was outrageous. I just don't think his comments or other ridiculous ones bring down the overall positive good of the event. On the whole it was about recognizing problems in the community and bringing solutions out into the open.

 

Your right the only exposure is what I have read here. But what if whites started saying buy white. You would probably tell me some stats and show why you think it is justified whith blacks and not whites, so lets say it is a white communitie in any of several major cities like chicago, where inner city whites are a minoirty in every since of the word. What if they started a buy white campaign? We have the black gongressional caucus,we have jet and ebony, we have miss black America, we have black only scholorships, we have black student unions on campus, but no white student unions. It seems the black community wants to preach it, but not walk it. We are stuck in a rut, and I fear we will never get out, or worse actually go backwards.

 

They'd be Racist Pigs, of course.

 

Bunyon,

First of I would not give stats at all. People have a right to shop where and when they want. It would not bother me. Besides the majority of businesses are white owned and operated, even in inner cities the majority are white owned, though they might be black operated. For this reason people usually do shop white owned businesses. The "buy black" campaign was meant to encourage the black community to support others in the community (i.e., to take notice of black owned business and support them). The difference is you, (generally speaking), have to remember the black population is a small percentage of the population.

Black college scholarships do not bother me. Music scholarships do not bother me. Any specialized academic or athletic scholarship does not bother me. There are multitudes of Christian organizations on college campuses, as well as math clubs, social clubs, music clubs, etc. Just because it is the black student union does not mean that a white person cannot join. The BSU at UK where I attended had a few white members. It is all about getting together with people who share your same interests. Face it on many college campuses African Americans account for maybe 2- 5% of the students. Why is it a problem for there to be a group where they can get together and encourage one another and socialize? BTW, there are many white only fraternities and sororities, but they are NOT considered racist. It is not that minorities cannot join, it is that they don't. The same goes for black student unions. All of these groups are meant to serve the interests of those who are members. One of the Christian organizations, when I was at UK, organized some sort of Olympics, where students could come and have fun, compete, and maybe hear the gospel. The black student union raised money, with the Student Activities Board, to bring Desmond Tutu to the campus to speak. This was for anybody that was interested in hearing him speak, not just BSU members. The sororities and fraternities have Greek week. Honestly I do not see a problem.

As far as the black congressional caucus is concerned, for a VERY LONG time African Americans were not represented in government at all. The government was run by white men. Do you know when or why the CBC was created? It's original 13 members joined together in 1969 to ensure that the African American community was properly represented. They wanted to influence domestic and international legislation so that it achieved equality of persons. They have typically stood at the forefront of all civil liberty legislation with other Congressional leaders, even if it was not specifically racial. It was basically created to make sure that those who were previously disenfranchised, or are disenfranchised, by the government, had/have a voice in government. The African American members of Congress are basically joined to make sure they properly represent these people. There are only 46 members today, and why they are typically Democrat, it is not like they can seriously sway a vote. I believe they consider themselves more like the "conscience" of Congress, when it comes to civil liberty issues. (I believe I had heard that phrase used before. It might even be on their website- http://cbcfinc.org/About/CBC/index.html

As far as Jet and Ebony. I view them as special interest magazines. Just as I view the Source magazine as a special interest magazine, or Vogue as a special interest magazine. All of these magazines have a target audience, just as every other magazine or newspaper does. Have you ever read Jet or Ebony? They deal with things that happen in the African American community, but white people are not necessarily excluded. These magazines highlight those who are successful in the African American population, I would think that would be a good thing. African Americans have a higher rate of poor people in proportion to their population size, so I generally view anything that highlights successful African Americans as positive. If they didn't have these magazines and waited for other magazines to highlight these people, it would not happen as often or as quickly. Good Housekeeping or People magazines, for example, target a more diversified population, therefore their content has to be more diversified.

 

At the million wanna be men march....


"... Michael Muhammad, national youth minister of the Nation of Islam, uttered the following.

"We want to say to our young brothers of the Bloods and of the Crips that we are one family. The real enemy does not wear red nor, necessarily, blue, but white, even when he's bu** naked."

(**self censored)