I have been asked to make this smaller.  However, as it has been responded
to I will send it in two parts, which should keep the size OK.  My second
post in response to Eric will be sent the same way tomorrow.
Peter Jessen, Portland

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Jessen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 5:26 PM
To: Michael Atherton; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Mpls] Gallmon's Racist Comments in the Strib

Michael Atherton wrote Sunday:
Although it is now possible for any individual African American to be
successful in today's American (sic), it is likely that it "will take
generations" for African American culture to develop the supports and needed
emphasis on education opportunity.  To deny  this reality fosters its
perpetuation.

Eric Mitchell wrote
It's taken me a while to admit, but I agree with Michael Atherton's post
too. Let me also say that I am getting a little sick of this 'racist' tag
being thrown at some Blacks by Whites ... Maybe its subjective what Gallmon
said, but being African American, living and interacting in the community,
serving the community, leading the community and serving briefly on its
school board certainly gives him credibility in what he percieves is a
problem in our community. Certainly gives him more credit than someone who
speaking from the outside. ...  Go to any teacher and ask. ...  Gallmon
simplied echoed what is being said and addressed in our community.

PeterJJ responds:
You guys are kidding right?

(1) You still have it backwards (or is it upside down?).  It is to affirm
this cultural lie that fosters the perpetuation of poor education.  I'm
astonished at the claims made.  "Any can be successfull?"  Does this include
all the "any's" (80%) of Black youth in the justice system or the 83% who
don't graduate from high school?   And if "any" why then must it "take
generations."  These are mutually exclusive.

(2) Al Gallmon is the spokesperson?  How does his  eight years trump Ron
Edwards' 40 years in the community?  More importantly, how does his
"subjective" statement trump the empirical facts and figures used by Ron
Edwards?  How does Al's narrow involvement trump Ron's broad involvment?
And how does Al and his preacher/forum buddies going ballistic over Ron's
book before it came out and telling their constituencies that they should
neither buy nor read the book trump Ron's honest attempt to look the truth
in the eye and not be afraid of it?  What are they afraid of?  You want a
spokesman?  Don't call Al or the NAACP.  They speak for Whites.  They speak
for another DFL supported jobs for Black leaders program that keeps Black
leaders from leading (hey, money talks).  Ron is only a spokesman if you
seek someone wanting to speak for truth for all, for someone wanting equal
access and equal opportunity for all, Black or White or other.   And if you
want "objective" not "subjective" and you want "empirical" data and an a
historical understanding over feelings of the current myths and quagmire of
Minneapolis, read his book.  And what is "ask any teacher about?"  That's
good.  In other words, ask any fox guarding the hen house.  Not a good idea.
To pull out one of the oldest political chestnuts, yet correct regardless of
which party is using it:  we need not an echo but a choice.

(3) Gallmon is the guy who colluded with White voters to become NAACP Prez
(they all knew the gal he would shortly replace was leaving town for another
NAACP assignment; why do they think we are so stupid?); Al and the NAACP
"pulled a Florida," as it was put to me by Blacks other than Ron, when the
NAACP disqualified most of the Blacks voting for Ron.  85% of those voting
for the winner were White.  The NAACP is not a Black organization any more.
It is a DFL shil and its politics in maintaining control are vicious.
Jesse, in the latest Time magazine, warned Ah-nuld that in politics he'd
find the real predators.  We see them in the NAACP.  We see them at
Holllman/Heritage Park that the NAACP is supposed to be tracking but is
turning its eyes the other way.   Al and his friends represent the
Planatation bosses.  Ron represents the field hands.  Which do you think
will tell you the HUMAN truth?

(4) There is an easy way for us Whites to stop calling either Blacks or
Whites racist:  end it.  Ron's book outlines how to start that process.  I
have yet to have one person refute one line in the book (one exception:  Ron
quoted a number from the Skyway news that in turn was quoting a consulting
firm that had the wrong number itself; nonetheless, he was, otherwise, re
Hollman/Heritage Park, "dead on."

(5) This "feel good ideal" about "any" is followed by the the equivalent of
the James Baldwin statement Ron quotes in his book that Blacks are told to
have "Patience, and shuffle the cards."  It is a real put down.  It flies in
the face of the results in school districts like Milwaukee where, with
vouchers and a different approach, AND EVEN WITHOUT PARENTAL SUPPPORT (the
latest excuse of choice is now to blame lack of parental involvement, so
that once again the institution is off the hook) they immediately turned
around performance of urban ghetto kids.  To jump on the "it will take
generations" bandwagon reflects deeply felt racism:  it again says Blacks
can't make the leap.  This is the tired old argument of the 1998 Kerner
Commission Report, which has been the Democratic Bible for keeping Blacks
down, that Blacks are not like other immigrants and thus can't make it like
them.  I lived in the Ramparts area of L.A. (for Fx fans, "Shield's" turf)
in South Central L.A.  Half the buildings I passed on the way to 9th grade
were burned to the ground after Rodney King, as was the corner where I sold
newspapers.  We had gangs.  The area is filled with Korean green grocers,
etc.  They made it without knowing the language well.  But they weren't
living under the "guidelines" of the Kerner Commission Report.

(6) Yes, culture is huge.  But the human being has a spirit that can grasp
culture and shake it and make it something wonderful and new.  This is what
inner city schools are doing where allowed to do so with vouchers.   I know
the term vouchers is making some on the list hurl, but facts are facts.
Indeed, in the 70s, in graduate school, the prediction of socialist social
science professors who didn't believe in vouchers still predicted that
because the liberals had turned education into a jobs program for education
school factories that eventually vouchers would be used to shake up the
public schools, which they believed would then change and negate the need
further for vouchers.  We'll see.

Peter Jessen, Portland

See Part II, with the balance, follows this post.

TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject 
(Mpls-specific, of course.)

________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to