A+ R A-

News Wire

Why Blacks Didn't Celebrate Bin Laden's Killing

E-mail Print PDF


By Stacey Patton, Special to the NNPA from thedefendersonline.com –

Understandably, the killing of Osama bin Laden unleashed strong emotions among Americans – relief, satisfaction, fears of retribution, denial, and even exuberance.

But, there was something distasteful about the raucous celebrations that took place outside the White House, in Times Square and at Ground Zero. The late night news coverage gave us a one-night affair of fists pumping in the air, jubilant cries of “USA! USA!,” and demonstrators singing that famous post-game victory song “Na Na Na, Hey, Hey, Hey, Good-bye!”

The next morning, a Muslim Community Center in Portland, Maine reported that it had been attacked by graffiti artists overnight. Scrawled across the base of the building, which serves mainly Somali Muslims, were the words: “Osama Today, Islam Tomorrow” and “Long live the West.” Those hateful words underscore the fact the war on terror is not over. And, neither is the war on ignorance and hate.

A week later, American Muslims have been given a chance to respond with a mix of relief, anxiety, and perhaps naïve hope that anti-Muslim sentiment will let up. There has also been a great deal of media buzz about whether or not the public celebrations among a small minority of people were appropriate.

One obvious point that has been missed in the commentary is that those celebrations were mostly devoid of Black people. The fact is that in Harlem and the Black sections of Brooklyn there were no spontaneous gatherings full of chanting, cussing, flag waving, chest bumping, carousing, and singing with strangers. There was no loud collective orgy of national pride and triumphalism in any other Black public squares across America.

Now, why is that?

It’s not that Black Americans, whose patriotism is often undervalued, do not feel some of the same emotions as those who took to the streets last Sunday night. Our quiet response speaks to our long-held understanding of what struggle is – our domestic struggle as a marginalized community is ongoing. We know that the war is not over and that neutralizing Osama bin Laden was a goal but only as part of a war that is not over.

Perhaps Black America took its cue from President Obama’s coolness about the ordeal. He did not, unlike his predecessor, descend atop a naval ship and declare “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.” Thursday’s ceremony and quiet conversations with those directly affected by the 9-11 attacks speak to this fact. In fact, Black America’s rather solemn response is actually congruent not only to the President, but of most White Americans.

I have to give the majority of White America its due. Those frat party celebrations overwhelming do not represent the norm reaction among most Americans, many of whom have been vocally critical of those spectacles. A plethora of outspoken liberal voices have aptly described what those scenes really represent – opportunistic pockets of America that see bin Laden’s death as a reason to boost American exceptionalism and to reclaim hegemony on the world stage at a time of domestic instability and uncertainty.

Yet some pundits have that the raucous celebrations aren’t a bad thing and that their triumphant nationalism is somehow healthy for our national psyche.

Garrett Quinn, a writer for the Boston Globe, illustrates my point:

“As Americans we’ve been down and out for a few years. The economy is in the tank, we’re involved in three wars, we’re in a severe budget crisis, and for the first time we are uncertain about our future as the world’s lone superpower. This victory over our national enemy gave us a moment, however brief, to thump our chests, wave our flags, and shoot off fireworks. It gave us a moment to carouse with strangers and sing songs in crowded public spaces. Public Enemy Number One was vanquished and it was time to celebrate and feel good about ourselves. And there isn’t a damn thing wrong with that.”

Thankfully, our President, Black America and most of White America see it differently. The “triumphant nationalism” and arrogance is coming mostly from armchair pundits who haven’t set foot on the battlefield or near a uniform. For the rest of us, we are resolute in our understanding that the struggle continues. We will have to battle the terrorists and those who wrongfully want to set us up as masters of the universe and thereby hated targets.

Stacey Patton is a writer for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

Congressman John Lewis Receives Joint Center's Louis E. Martin Award

E-mail Print PDF

Special to the NNPA from the AFRO-American Newspaper –

On May 3rd, the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies recognized U.S. Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) with the 2011 Louis E. Martin Great American Award. The Joint Center’s highest honor was given to Lewis for his decades of service as an advocate of civil and human rights and for strengthening the American community.

Lewis received the award at the Joint Center's annual Gala Dinner at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington, D.C. The event drew more than 500 people including government officials, members of Congress and business, and civic and community pioneers from across the nation.

For more than 50 years, the group noted, Lewis has been a pioneering community and political leader and civil rights advocate.

The presentation was given on the eve of the 50th anniversary of the day the first Freedom Riders left Washington by bus on a trip to the south to exercise their right to interstate travel and to fight laws that enforced segregation. Lewis was among the first riders and was severely beaten during the event.

“Congressman Lewis continues to lead by his example, working for racial harmony and inspiring all Americans to make the most of their right to engage in the process of shaping our nation's future,” Joint Center President and CEO Ralph B. Everett said at the event, according to a press release.

Lewis reflected on the turbulent events at the gala, and said that the first violent encounter occurred in Rock Hill, S.C., where he and his co-riders attempted to enter a bus station waiting room that was reserved for Whites. But, he explained that one of the men who beat him came to his office and apologized to him two years ago. Lewis added that while times have definitely changed, America still has work to do.

“Some people ask me these days whether the election of President Obama is the fulfillment of Dr. King's dream,” the congressman said at the event, according to a press release. “I’m quick to say ‘no.’ It’s just a major down payment. There are still too many people in America that are left behind.”

The award, named after celebrated journalist, presidential advisor, and co-founder of the Joint Center Louis E. Martin, is given to individuals who epitomize King's dream for justice, compassion, and racial unification.

Past recipients of the award include former presidents Jimmy Carter and William J. Clinton, Muhammad Ali, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, and civil rights icon Dr. Dorothy I. Height.

Founded in 1970, the Joint Center is one of the nation's leading research and public policy institutions and the sole one whose work focuses on African Americans and other people of color.

Nigerian Citizen Journalist Receives Major Press Freedom Award

E-mail Print PDF

Special to the NNPA from the Global Information Network –

On the occasion of World Press Freedom Day, the Omidyar Network of Redwood City, California, announced the award of nearly $5 million in funding to four media-related groups involved in investigative and citizen journalism in the developing world.

The four groups are: African Media Initiative (Kenya): the SaharaReporters project (Nigeria); Media Development Loan Fund (U.S.); and the Committee to Protect Journalists (Africa programs).

Announcing the grant to Sahara Reporters, an online network of underground and citizen journalists operating inside Nigeria, Omidyar’s Stephen King said: “They put a lens on the Nigerian government by covering corruption, disbursement of oil revenues, and graft on a massive scale. [SaharaReporters.com] provides much more [information] than a newspaper or news outlet might. It’s a forum where controversial stories can be aired.”

Sowore Omoyele, founder and publisher of the NY-based Sahara Reporters, described the work of his group as far-reaching. “We had 1,700 reporters on Blackberry alone who volunteered to cover the [recent Nigerian] elections for us," he said. "They took smartphone photos of police repression and election violence.”

“We report events, news, and write reports of real time issues. It is our response to the failure – the refusal or lack of will on the part of professional journalists – to report real news to the people … SR is doing well in that regard. We have broken the sound and speed barriers of reporting authentic, evidence-based news.

“Omidyar Network believes a healthy government – one that is responsive to its citizens -- requires a healthy, robust fourth estate. By focusing additional efforts on fostering investigative and citizen journalism, we believe we will be catalyzing transparency efforts that will positively affect millions of people,” said King, who heads Omidyar’s global government transparency programs.

To date, Omidyar Network has committed more than $400 million to for-profit companies and non-profit organizations that foster economic advancement and encourage individual participation in the areas of microfinance, entrepreneurship, property rights, government transparency, consumer Internet, and mobile. To learn more about Omidyar Network, visit www.omidyar.com.

Security Heightened for Obama's Grandmother After Bin Laden Death

E-mail Print PDF

Special to the NNPA from the Global Information Network –

A beefed-up battalion of security was ordered around the rural Kenyan home of President Obama’s grandmother following the fatal shooting of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

“We received reports of plans to attack the home of Mama Sarah Obama and we immediately put in place adequate security measures,” local police chief Stephen Cheteka told the African Review, a Kenyan paper.

In the U.S., news of bin Laden’s killing set off an emotional rally of thousands in the capital city and in NYC at Ground Zero, the site of the fallen Twin Towers. But in Africa, fears of retaliation by the surviving al-Qaida network were uppermost in the minds of many citizens.

"The loss of [al-Qaeda's] leader may first upset the movement but then it will regroup and continue," said Kenya’s Prime Minister Raila Odinga. Douglas Sidialo, blinded by shards of flying glass in the bombing of the U.S. mission in Nairobi in 1998, said bin Laden’s death was "justice from the maker (God). However, I would rather he had been captured and confessed to his evil deeds… I fear this might trigger renewed recruitment amongst those who view bin Laden as a martyr."

South African journalist Julian Rademeyer shared the view. "In death, the myth of bin Laden lives on. Would've been preferable that he stood trial and could be seen for what he was."

Prof Mwesiga Baregu, a political analyst at St Augustine University in Tanzania, concurred. “They should have tried to capture him alive."

Meanwhile, Foreign Minister of Mali Soumeylou Boubeye Maiga warned: “'The event raises the risk in the short term of a headlong rush by the movement. We have to be careful - particularly in the next three to six months.”

Study: Race a Factor in Charity, Social Programs

E-mail Print PDF

By Dwight Ott, Special to the NNPA from The Philadelphia Tribune –

No one was home in the small, fenced encampment hidden in the trees on the south side of the approach to the Ben Franklin Bridge leading to Philadelphia.

The inhabitants may have been away because of the chill and the unceasing downpour last Wednesday that cut rivulets of rainwater in the mud and grass. Or they might have went looking for food to bring back to their three tent-like hovels, which where patched together with clear plastic, mosquito mesh, blue and yellow blankets, rags and towels.

But, whatever the reason for the absence, it was clear that the people living there were literally on “the other side of the fence” — or, as one author called, in “The Other America.”

According to three, Ivy League-affiliated researchers, such ragged encampments are likely the result of America being stingier than Europe in providing for its most down and out citizens.

And, the reason for this stinginess: Race!

“I think people who are willing to cut Medicaid and Medicare are driven by heterogeneity,” said Albert Alesina, one of the researchers, with “heterogeneity” here clearly meaning racial differences.

Indeed, based on their 2001 study — which they say is still applicable today — the three researchers concluded that race is a major factor in the generosity or lack of generosity built into American social assistance programs. With unabashed bluntness, the study — completed by Harvard economics professors Alesina and Edward Gleaser, and Bruce Sacerdote of Dartmouth — stated: “Race is the single most important predictor of support for welfare. America’s troubled race relations are clearly a major reason for the absence of an American welfare state.”

The study goes on to conclude that, “A natural generalization of race-based theory is that Americans think of the poor as members of some different group other than themselves, whereas Europeans think of the poor as members of their own group.”

In other words, people who dislike transferring money to people of a different color seem to be a major determinant in why there is a “redistribution gap” between the United States and Europe.

But, while the professors assert that race is the most “salient” predictor of support for welfare, they are unable to fully identify why this is the case.

The professors state: “We do not really know why interpersonal altruism seems linked to race. It is possible that human beings are hard-wired to dislike people with different skin color. A more reasonable theory is that human beings are genetically programmed to form in-group, out-group associations and to prefer members of what they perceive as their own group.”

In their study, “Why doesn’t the U.S. Have a European Style Welfare State?,” the researchers indicate that White Americans have no problem giving to programs that are seen as supportive of Whites, but some oppose programs which seem to support Blacks.

“People have a negative, hostile reaction when they see welfare recipients of a different race, and a sympathetic reaction when they see welfare recipients of their own race,” the study states.

And, at least two of the researchers contacted last week said they believed their study was as relevant now as it was a decade ago. Indeed, today, as an urgency to cut the deficit ramps up, entitlement programs — which typically help Blacks and other minorities — are on the chopping block.

“We have hit a point where it is obvious we can’t give to everybody,” said Sacerdote, referring to the current hard times that have limited America’s options. “We have reached the point where it’s obvious we can’t give to everybody.”

Sacerdote also said that hard decisions will have to be made. “The question of how to divide the pie is becoming more important,” he stated.

The study also demonstrates why Blacks may be among the hardest hit by the recession and current budget cutting. “Racial discord plays a critical role in determining beliefs about the poor,” the researchers conclude in their document. “Since racial minorities are highly over-represented among the poorest Americans, any income-based redistribution measures will redistribute disproportionately to these minorities.”

However, a recent poll found that 70 percent of tea party members — a group particularly intent on cutting spending in social programs — do not favor cuts in Medicaid and Medicare.

In the recent McClatchy-Marist survey,70 percent of ‘tea party supporters’ were strongly opposed to cutting the healthcare plan for the elderly and indigent, compared to about 80 percent of registered voters.

And yet, phasing out Medicare for those under 55 has been a major proposal by U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, a high profile Republican legislator.

Republicans seem to have targeted social programs, which heavily benefit Blacks, for the very reason that Blacks make up a high percentage of the impoverished and unemployed. To some Whites, these programs seem to represent a “transfer” or “redistribution” of wealth.

It’s almost as if anti-socialism — many on the right have called Obama and his supporters “socialists” — has become a code word for pro-racism, one professor agreed.

According to the study, while Europeans consider the poor as people like themselves who just may be having hard luck. “Americans are more likely to associate poverty with laziness and to consider the poor unworthy.”

Because of the resultant neglect, the poor in the United States are likely to be “poorer” than those in Europe, the study claims.

“It would appear that, because of a smaller emphasis on policies that redistribute toward the poor, the bottom decile [10 percent] of the income ladder in the United States is less well off than the bottom decile in European countries. That is, the U.S. poor are really poor.”

The study also said America has a smaller government than some and yet larger government tends to reduce inequalities.

Even among U.S. states there is a race-based disparity. Especially in the South, welfare benefits are smaller in areas with large, non-majority Black populations.

And though opportunities seem to be about the same in the U.S. and Europe, Americans seem — by a nearly 30 percent polling margin — to believe that the poor have more of a chance of escaping poverty in the U.S. than they may actually have.

“Americans are inherently more hostile to government, and more prone to believe that governments are wasteful and likely to spend on projects that the voters oppose. Indeed, the United States was created from an ant-igovernment revolution, and its history includes a civil war in which roughly half the country fought against the federal government,” states the study.

Here, the authors seem to redeem a smidgen of the image of America’s generosity by pointing out that, while European social welfare is more generous, Americans give more to charities than Europeans. But, the study does not make it clear if that charity cuts across racial lines.

What was obvious, though, was that the inhabitants of that little Camden encampment near the Ben Franklin Bridge probably are having a harder time here than if they were in Europe.

Because whatever their ethnicity or nationality, the ultimate reason for their economic disparity, like so much else in this country, likely does have more to do with skin color than pure economics or objective prioritization.

Page 276 of 372

BVN National News Wire