Original message from: Eric Mitchell, Mon 8/18/2003 9:08 PM PJJ response, part 2 of 3:
That Doug and Ron have lost elections and still come back to serve the community as well as they do is a badge of distinction, in my mind, not the sign of losers or people with vendettas. It shows the degree to which they follow ideas, not self. And although I have never heard any of these men use the term "Uncle Tom," its an interesting reference. In Harriett Beecher Stowe's book "Uncle Tom's Cabin," Tom is the hero, a model of good behavior and trying to do the best for his fellows, to help free them. Few people who use the term have ever read the book, just as, by Eric's own admission, he condemns Ron's book that he has not read. And again, no one mentioned "the man" although it is a good enough term to refer to the institutions that carry out the policies that perpetuate the results Ron fights. As Eric reminds us, "there is institutional racism" and that is all Ron talks about: institutional racism. Gallman represents an institution, the local branch of the NAACP and thus has the opportunity to do great good as well as great harm. This thread was started by others. I have never taken any of the comments to be about Al but to be about the NAACP of which he s the spokesman and was so identified by the Strib in the quotation attributed to him. The question remains: can something be done or not, can it be done sooner or later? We've been here before: compare Carter and Clinton. Carter told us to suck it up and deal with our "malaise" as, like Hoover, he didn't see that anythingn could be done (see Ron's Web Log #97). Clinton, on the other hand, discussed "hope" that is now expressed by Condi Rice and (gasp) Bush (see Ron's web log #89 at www.TheMinneapolisStory.com). Ron was not embarrassed by the NAACP. Disappointed, yes, but not for himself: for the organization. But embarassed? No. If anything the NAACP should have felt embarrassed. Indeed, through its actions, it has shown it has no shame and will not be embarrassed by the shameful way it behaves with its closed door meetings and exclusionary tactics, long documented in on-going, in-depth coverage by the Minneapolis Spokesman-Recorder (I'm sure they would be glad to provide past copies for those wishing to read more about that). There was no attack on Al Gallmon, only on what he has said and the ideas he has suggested and the institution (NAACP) he represents. Eric lays this at the feet of Ron not being willing to accept electoral results but refuses to address the fact that the particular election Ron lost was fixed to purposefully deny Ron so that the preferences of the White NAACPers were followed (a great example of serving "plantation bosses"). This, of course, was a repeat of the same process in the elections of 1999 that Ron writes about in Chapter 14 of his book, pp. 228-229. He quotes from City Pages, March 17, 1999, and their cover story "Black Like Us," featuring the faces of Dee Long, Phyllis Kahn, Don Fraser and Arvonne Fraser, all White. That election opened with a long line of Whites who were there to vote. Why? As the article pointed out, they were there to vote such that the "right" Blacks won election and were in charge. To suggest that Ron "doesn't give a damn about the kids in the schools" greatly misreads my post and shows a definite lack of reading of his chapter on education and betrays the attitude Ron fights: not doing anything to change it or feeling nothing can be done to change it. To say that he "lacks solutions" again reveals commenting on a book not read, as his solutions process suggestions are all gathered together in Chapter 17. Now you can say that what he proposes here won't do the trick. Fair enough. But then you have to take the next step: demonstrate why. Please do so. But it is bad faith to say he has presented no solutions when he clearly has. The next logical step is to show why what he proposes won't work rather than say he proposes nothing. My own response is that what Ron has thoughtfully laid out a process that I believe would work in every city in America. Minneapolis is fortunate to have Ron in town with his thoughtful suggestions. Ron loves to tell the story (see Web Log entry #97 on www.TheMinneapolisStory.com <http://www.TheMinneapolisStory.com>, of how <b>Herbert Hoover,</b> riding with FDR to FDR's innauguration, <b>said of the depression, "nothing can be done."</b> Hoover�s successor at the innauguration, <b>FDR didn�t know either, but knew the status quo was not the answer and that change had to occur, sooner rather than later</b> and so he gathered the best minds he could find to figure it out. They started with programs developed by the federal government that Hoover ignored because of his feeling that nothing could be done (even though he was the guy in charge of the programs that brought Europe out of starvation, etc., after World War I). Ron suggests (p. 305 of his book) starting with "a series of Black on Black and Black on White discussions" for the purpose of "developing a set of 'Sullivan Principles for Minneapolis'." To learn more about Leon Sullivan, read Ron's Chapter 14. In chapters 5 and 17 he lists his YESes and NOs for guiding public policy. As noted, all of his suggestions are summarized in Chapter 17. Peter Jessen, Portland 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
