ISIS Praying For Donald Trump Victory

By N Oji Mzilikazi

1 November 2016

Shady people often employ the technique of avoiding and deflecting criticism of themselves, their ideology and/or platform by pointing out to others the flaws and errors in their competition or in another. Donald Trump has mastered that art.

At a January 2016 campaign rally in Biloxi, Mississippi, the then Republican presidential hopeful in his typical mischaracterization and impugnation of the character and records of others style, declared: “They’ve created Isis. Hillary Clinton created Isis with Obama.”

Donald Trump is not the only Republican to state such.

In November 2015, Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum told supporters at the Florida GOP’s Sunshine Summit in Orlando, Florida: “ISIS is a creation of a political decision by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to abandon Iraq — against all of our generals’ recommendations, against all of the policy recommendations.”

Republicans cannot but point fingers and blame Obama (And Hilary Clinton, his then heir designate.) for all the ills he inherited—from an 8-year Republican administration. Doing so is much better that putting a mirror to their face. Thus, blaming Obama was one of the GOP main talking points.

How can Republicans explain to the American and British public among others, that the many lives sacrificed in Iraq in pursuit of Iraqi Freedom, and the hundreds of thousands of bodies (and minds) broken and mangled, as well as the families of soldiers damaged and wrecked by their father, son, brother, husband or boyfriend/lover answering the call to duty was for nought; given that many of cities they fought and died for ended up in the hands of Isis—only to be fought for again?

The Republican Party gave birth to Isis. The Republican Administration under George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Karl Rove, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair created Isis by their illegal invasion of Iraq.

Forget what you heard, ignore what was written, even the findings of the British Chilcot Iraq War Inquiry Report. George Bush invaded Iraq for one reason and one reason alone: To ensure Israel’s safety. WMDS was just a ruse.

Courtesy American and Coalition hands, Mesopotamia, one of the great cradles of civilization was bombed into the stone ages—is in disarray. One less enemy for Israel. A nation under reconstruction lacks the wherewithal to engage in any sort of concerted military aggression. One less enemy for Israel.

Didn’t Israel and its lobbies ratchet-up the screams about the threat to civilization that is Persia—the need to bomb Iran, immediately after Iraq was invaded and Saddam Hussein toppled? George W. declared it would be World War III, if Israel was attacked by nuclear Iran.

Bush never had a U.S. exit strategy for Iraq. The Republicans were prepared to have American boots on the ground in Iraq for the next 1000 years.

In 2008, Republican presidential candidate, Senator John McCain criticized Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama’s calls for withdrawing US troops from Iraq. McCain declared that a U.S. pullout would harm Israel’s security. McCain will have them stay 100 years.

At a Washington 15 Conference, a United Jewish Communities event, Republican Lawrence Eagleburger, a former U.S. Secretary of State stated “that those people who might want to ‘cut and run’ from Iraq now are endangering Israel,” and that leaving Iraq made Iran stronger.

In a 15 December 2011, op-ed piece in the British Guardian, John Bolton who has served in several Republican administrations, lamented the complete withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. He called it a tragic mistake and stated: “It jeopardises the gains made by President Bush’s (and Tony Blair’s) eminently correct 2003 decision to overthrow Saddam Hussein.”

To paint an illegal war to which Blair, Bush and company deserve to be tried for crimes against humanity as “eminently correct” underlines the neocon ideologies of prevarication and mendaciously defending the indefensible in promotion of their politicised version of truth.

For all the evils attributed to Saddam, America’s invasion of Iraq set the country back at least 100 years, and Bolton has the audacity to speak of “gains.”

Given the widespread destruction unleashed upon Iraq by Coalition Forces, and the subsequent increase of sectarian violence and suicide bombings against Iraqi civilians, pray tell, what were the gains, and who were the real beneficiaries of said invasion?

It is one thing for a foreign power to overtly or covertly support an insurrectionist movement in a sovereign state, and quite another for a foreign power to invade that state.

America was not invited by Iraqis to invade the country nor did they do so in support of revolutionary forces trying to overthrow Saddam Hussein.

So, other than the companies for whom war and reconstruction are multi-billion industries, who was the true beneficiary of America’s invasion of Iraq? Israel, I submit.

Bolton had no qualms exposing the neocon agenda: “Overthrowing the regimes in Iran and Syria could have been substantially advanced during the US military presence in Iraq,” he wrote.

And who would be the main beneficiary of a destabilised Iran and Syria? Not the United States for sure. Talk about hubris and imperial ways to strategically reshape power in the Middle East—destroy Israel enemies by proxy.

It’s interesting the way Americans are so cavalier about overthrowing of regimes. Yet, when Japan struck at Pearl Harbour and Al Qaida on 9/11, they invoked the mantle of righteousness and displayed wonderment as to why they were attacked.

Per the adage, “Nature abhors a vacuum,” the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, the dismantling of his party—and soldiers, a country in disarray; severely broken infrastructures, shortages of every kind, anger, resentment, frustration, massive employment, the increase in sectarian violence, the human hard-wiring for strong and organised leadership—and therein the vacuum—filled by Isis.  Isis is George Bush’s baby, and Donald Trump’s godson.

Given all Donald Trump’s pronouncement on Muslims, the prospects of a Donald Trump victory has Isis and every other extremist Islamic groups ecstatic. They have circled November 9 as the beginning of the Trump Era and the rise of America’s Muslims.

They see a Trump presidency as enthronement of deeply held anti-Muslim rhetoric and exploiting that is the perfect Pablum to mobilize the mass of American Muslims contended to live quiet and peaceful lives in the “bowels of the Great Satan.”

Lest we forget, on the heels of The Donald call for a total ban of Muslims from entering the United States, Somalia’s Islamist militant group al Shabaab used his words in a recruiting film.

A Trump presidency is bound to increase homegrown terrorism, especially by lone wolves, as well as encourage copy cats; bored youths in pursuit of thrills.

With a Trump presidency, I not only have to look over my shoulder; be on guard from the police and subtle acts of racism, but I must now profile/be wary of everyone when I’m out and about, especially people from the Middle East for fear that…

Emancipation 2016: The Economic Game

By N Oji Mzilikazi

7 August 2016

Power respects power. Economic empowerment/economic success lends itself to accessing power.

Failure of a race, ethnicity or community to be empowered economically ensures they remain powerless, weak, marginalised, exploited, and the footstool of others.

Economics is at the heart of anti-Black racism. Allowing Blacks a place at the buffet table is perceived as a threat to the rights of whites to gorge to their hearts content. Also, has the potential to deny whites their rightful place in the line, send some to the back of the line, and even leave fellow members of the race hungry and destitute.

In keeping with the adage, “Give a person an inch, and they’ll want to take a yard,” whites have long feared that giving Blacks access could find them playing second fiddle. A situation that is totally incomprehensible and unacceptable. Thus, racial discrimination is rooted in economics — and racism enduring support.

Since “whites” determined — set the rules of “the economic game,” racism places limits on the kind of money Blacks make, even when the Black individual is the best at what they do; are at top of their game. Case in point: Serena Williams.

Serena Williams is indisputably the best female tennis player in the world, and has been for the longest while. Yet, Williams doesn’t command the sponsorship dollars that usually go with being the best.

Maria Sharapova is not in Serena’s class; doesn’t come close. Serena has 22 Grand Slam titles while Sharapova has 5; Serena has twice the amount of single career titles than Sharapova; Serena has 71, Sharapova 35; and Maria has not defeated Williams since 2004. Serena has had 17 consecutive victories over Sharapova. The last was at Wimbledon 2015. But since 2004, Sharapova has been the world’s highest-paid female athlete. Serena can’t touch Sharapova when it comes to sponsorships.

Sharapova’s win over Serena at Wimbledon 2004 elevated her to tennis “golden girl.”

In embodying the Eurocentric stereotype of beauty; tall, thin, and with blonde hair and blue eyes, Sharapova became — was embraced as the long awaited white hope to save women’s tennis from the clutches of the “Amazonian” Williams sisters; Venus Williams and Serena Williams, and the white face of tennis that fans and corporate sponsors alike were dying for — and what tennis needed.

This March, Sharapova revealed she failed a drugs test. She tested positive for the performance-enhancing drug meldonium/mildronate, a prohibited substance. The admission and subsequent provisional suspension by the International Tennis Federation (ITF) did not phase racket firm Head. It extended its contract with Sharapova.

When a two-year suspension (under appeal) was handed down to Sharapova in June, high-profile sponsors Nike, Head and Evian made it known they are standing by her.

Since “whites” are the ones that sign big money cheques, they have templates as to the kinds of Blacks they want to pay, give their money/donations/charity to, as well as limits as to how much money they are willing to pay.

The December 2014 leaked Sony Pictures emails exposed Screen Gems president Clint Culpepper calling Kevin Hart a “whore” for wanting additional monies to use his social media brand to support a film.

While actors are obligated to do press junkets song-and-dance routines to promote a film, they decide the management, direction and content of their social media accounts like Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

Just because Hart is Black, Culpepper believes the comedian and actor is stupid as well. Hence,  he should use his social media accounts for free — in service to a multinational corporation that could’ve afford to pay — and most likely paid Hart much less than standard industry practices for the role, simply because he’s Black.

While sports, music and comedy enabled huge numbers of Blacks to make serious money, it is only a certain kind of Blacks whites tend to embrace. Namely, those willing to engage in self-depreciation, show their pearly whites, display ignorance or portray clumsiness to elicit laughter, those that use the cloaks of intelligence, respectability or insightful understanding of complexities to submerge or minimize their blackness, and those willing to chastise other Blacks/the race over its shortcomings and failures.

In short, Blacks whose presence do not puncture the parameters of white comfort. Thus, whites are comfortable with Blacks like Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods. Step forth full of self-confidence, killer instincts, aggressiveness, and radiating pride of race like Muhammed Ali, Venus Williams or Serena Williams; be an accomplished and uppity Black, and the media/whites cannot wait to get their hate on and see that person truly humbled — face prone in the dirt, eating the humblest of humble pie.

In an attack on Venus and Serena Williams, Czechoslovakia born Martina Navratilova lamented, “They have made excuses and not given credit to their opponents. They’re afraid to show any kind of humility. Humble doesn’t mean you’re weak.”

The nature of the beast that is racism is that even when an accomplished Black person is “liked” by whites, racism demands their humbling (honest contrition) as part-payment for wrong-doing.

On the heels of Tiger Woods marital infidelity, golf legend Tom Watson called for Woods “to show some humility to the public.”

As RLP, the author of the piece noted, Woods sexual transgressions “has nothing to do with golf or fans of golf. He cheated on his wife, not on the golf course. Apologies are for him to make his wife and family and those closest to him…”

In 1999, the NAACP called for an economic boycott of South Carolina on account of the State’s insistence to fly the Confederate flag on top of the Statehouse dome/on the grounds of the state capitol, and asked prominent African American athletes to bypass South Carolina events.

Serena heeded the call. Serena boycotted the 2000 Family Circle Cup in Hilton Head, South Carolina.

Serena boycotted Indian Wells for 14 years on account of the boos and racial slurs thrown at her father Richard and big sister Venus, when they came to see her contest the 2001 finals. Venus boycotted Indian Wells for 15 years.

Stardom, the lure of big money and interests of sponsors didn’t matter to Venus and Serena. That is unapologetic Blackness for you.

The historical and economic reality for persons of African descent to that being the best or brightest doesn’t translate into opportunities to make “big, fat, white commercial money” or bankability.

Acceptance in the white world in conjunction with being on top of one’s game is requisite. And that acceptance is dependent on two things and two things alone. The person(s) must have and exude a non-threatening personality and be proponents of the politics of contentment and accommodation.

On April 13, 1997, Tiger Woods won the Masters. In doing so, Tiger became the first African American to win a major professional golf tournament.

Fuzzy Zoeller, the 1979 Masters champion, was recorded saying, “That little boy is driving well and he’s putting well. He’s doing everything it takes to win. So, you know what you guys do when he gets in here? You pat him on the back and say congratulations and enjoy it and tell him not serve fried chicken next year. Got it?” Then Zoeller smiled, snapped his fingers, and walked away. Then he turned and added, “or collard greens or whatever the hell they serve.”

Earl Woods, Tiger’s father insisted, “Fuzzy is a big jokester. He is not a racist. I have heard him say a lot worse on the golf course…

Is it any wonder Tiger Woods could go on the Oprah Winfrey show, ignore centuries of racial classification and the One Drop rule; namely, any person who has one drop of black blood will be classified as Black, and declare himself “Cablinasian” – his coined term to reflect the inclusion of Caucasian, black, American Indian and Asian genes that comprise his racial identity? Cablinasian also infers race-neutrality?

Players of every sport are fired, traded, or don’t have their contract renewed. Team owners and players are known to terminate contracts with coaches. Golf is no exception.

Tiger Woods winning ways made Steve Williams, his caddie, a multi-millionaire. Williams was on the bag for 13 of Woods 14 major championship titles.

After twelve years of highs and lows, Tiger and Williams parted ways. In nothing but a display of bad mindedness and ungratefulness, Williams publicly dissed Woods upon Adam Scott, for whom he was caddying, won the Bridgestone Invitational.

At the November 4, 2011, HSBC Champions pre-tournament caddie dinner in Shanghai, China, Williams explained his rational at Bridgestone: “It was my aim to shove it right up that black arsehole.” The remark “left the audience of players, caddies and sponsors aghast.”

Since Williams choose “black” to qualify and preface the arsehole invective, he essentially attacked the roots of Woods’ identity, and by extension the Black (not Cablinasian) community to which Tiger belongs. Luckily for Williams, Woods doesn’t have a single revolutionary bone in his body, as well as feels appeasement makes him a bigger and better person.

Woods admitted to being hurt by the comments of his former caddie, but in Uncle Tom style and fashion declared, “Steve Williams is no racist.”

For all the money Tiger makes, and for all his reticence to wade into the issues of race or to fire returned salvos at racists, whites still do not have Tiger’s back.

Revelations of Woods marital infidelity resulted in major sponsors Accenture, AT&T, Gatorade and Gillette immediately running away from him as one would from fire. General Motors ended its free loner cars deal to Tiger. And that was just the beginning…

Rumors that the crashing of Woods’ car into a fire hydrant was on account of his wife hitting the vehicle with a golf club. Jesper Parnevik said he hoped Elin Nordegren, Tiger’s wife “uses a driver next time instead of the 3-iron.”

Golfers that secretly resented, envied or hated Tiger used Woods’ marital infidelity scandal to be free with their true feelings. The press was in a feeding frenzy, and there was no abatement in the deluge of hate.  Open season on Tiger hunting was of such, FBI special agent John V. Gillies, the person in charge of the FBI Miami division launched a broadside at Tiger Woods at a chamber of commerce meeting in Boca Raton, Florida.

Tiger Woods’ entry into golf and the Williams sisters into tennis raised both the level of play in the sport, and the attendance records for golf and tennis respectively.

40.1 million people watched the CBS telecast to see Tiger Woods win his second Masters on Sunday April 8, 2001. It was an increase of 33% over 2000, and was the second highest totals ever.

The largest viewing audience was in 1997, when Tiger won his first green jacket.

When NBC broadcasted the final day of competition of the 2000 US Open, Tiger’s participation and subsequent victory provided the network with its highest rating for the tournament since 1981.

Tiger’s British Open triumph that same year allowed ABC to have its biggest ratings of a Sunday.  So where did it go wrong for Tiger?

First, let’s not read too much into attendance figures. Large crowds did gather in colosseums of the ancient world to see gladiators fight to the death. Large numbers of white folks gathered to see enslaved Black males castrated as well as large numbers of white folks also gathered to see, jeer and cheer Black males being hung from trees, also burnt alive hanging from said trees.

While the motivation behind television viewership or crowds in attendance to see Tiger Woods, Serena Williams or Venus Williams could very well be to relish in their display of brilliance, it could also be they’re looking to see if that day is the day their white opponent(s) is going to step up, defeat them.

Lest we forget: When Serena Williams and Venus Williams were the Number 1 and Number 2 players in the world, as well as meeting in Grand Slam finals, sports and tennis prognosticators started preaching about the impending decline of the popularity of tennis. Then the infection spread among past and current players.

Argentina’s Gabriela Sabatini didn’t mince words. The retired legend of the game felt that the Williams sisters’ power game and domination were “ruining sports, these brutes. Perhaps they hit the ball too hard for the good of the game.”

Amélie Mauresmo, a Williams sisters contemporary opponent had the temerity to say it “was sad for women’s tennis’ and perhaps boring for the fans if there were more all-Williams finals.”

After Justine Henin lost her Wimbledon 2002 semi-match against Venus Williams, she submitted,

I think that maybe the crowd likes also to see the other players in different Grand Slam finals.”

A Grand Slam title is contested by 128 players; 64 in the top half of the draw and 64 in the bottom. Venus and Serena have to be on opposite sides of the draw to have a chance at contesting a final. An all-Williams final is the failure of the field;126 players, including the likes of Mauresmo and Henin, so why the objection — and hate?

When Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova met in finals after finals, there was never perception of the same two repeatedly playing each other as bad for the sport or articulation of same. But two sisters; two Black girls doing so are, according to tennis legend Martina Navratilova, “not great for the game.”

Navratilova made the comment on British television during Wimbledon 2010 as well as, “I hope it’s not both Williams in the finals.

While tennis fans are allowed to make such a statement, Martina Navratilova cannot. Navratilova has been employed as a television tennis analysist/commentator for years. And while announcers are entitled to speak on their dream match-up finals, it’s in poor taste for any one of them to root against any particular match-up. It’s also a disservice to the viewers.

When envy and racism join hands…  Navratilova has a long history of anti-Williams sisters bias.

When Serena defeated Venus in the 2002 French Open Finals 7-5, 6-3, Jon Wertheim of CNNSI wrote, “The sport will eventually suffer if the sisters can’t play more competitive matches.”

In the 1988 French Open Finals, Steffi Graff defeated Natasha Zvereva 6-0, 6-0 in 32 minutes. Are we to assume that although the Graff – Zvereva match was very short; Natasha was double bageled; didn’t win a single game, it was more competitive than the one contested by the sisters? Ah! The subtleties of racism…

The supposed concerned by tennis journalists, tennis commentators and past and current tennis players/opponents of the Williams sisters for fan enjoyment/fan boredom by an all Williams finals match-up is code to execute and express racism.

No professional athlete or sports team ever think of spectators’ enjoyment of a contested match. Their singular concern is winning. If viewers enjoy the battle, great. If not, an ugly win still goes into the athlete/team’s plus column.

Second, the media-bashing and hating on Tiger Woods over his affairs was no different from the bashing and hating on Janet Jackson when Justin Timberlake exposed her breast in the Super Bowl half-time show, Oprah when she endorsed Barack Obama’s candidacy for president of the United States, Serena Williams over her outburst at the US Open, Sean Puffy Coombs/P Diddy/Puff Daddy when a gun was found in his vehicle, Kobe Bryant when accused of rape, and when Michael Vick was associated with dogfighting. The backlash — driven by racism was swift and brutal.

The racial politics of the dollar game is this: Black excellence is despised, Black success is only tolerated — never fully endorsed, and Black success is undermined at the drop of a dime.

Neither making it nor having loads of money is ever saving grace for Blacks. A point hammered home by Gil Scott Heron in the song, Inner City Blues. Heron asked, “Are we stupid or just naive that we continue to believe that money can buy us anything including a slice of the American dream.” On the other hand, prominent whites are given the benefit of the doubt, presumption of innocence, and chances at redemption — and opportunities to salvage their career and make money. Think Robert Downey Jr., Charlie Sheen…

As you go about your business doing what you have to do in pursuit of that almighty dollar; even if that translates into having to downplay your blackness, don’t lose your soul. Don’t use your center!


Charles Barkley: Ignorance Personified

By N Oji Mzilikazi

18 July 2016

On the heels of four off-duty Minneapolis police officers working security at a WNBA’s Minnesota Lynx game leaving their posts on account of the players’ wearing pregame warm-up jerseys that carried the message of change, the names of Philando Castile and Alton Sterling who were shot to death by the police, and Black Lives Matter, ESPN sports journalist Bomani Jones delivered commentary that deserves not just acclamation, but being tweeted and retweeted.

Jones made the point: “You are not obligated to speak simply because you are good at doing something with a ball. That can lead you into some disastrous places.”

Time and time again, we’ve been exposed to personalities and celebrities pontificating on subjects and issues in which their understanding borders on the ignorant. But in their mind, and given a platform, they have Solomonic insights. When those persons are Black, their diarrhoea of the mouth becomes hurdles for people of African descent, as well as ammunition for those bent on sustaining inequalities; denying empowerment and social justice for the race.

Just a week ago we were exposed to Wendy Williams asinine comments about Historical Black Colleges and the NAACP.

And who can forget rapper Lupe Fiasco. I certainly cannot.

The election of Barack Obama to the presidency of the United States created an upswing in anti-Black sentiment and racial hate. Membership in right-wing militias and racist organizations increased exponentially.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, The number of Patriot groups, including armed militias, skyrocketed following the election of President Obama in 2008 – rising 813 percent, from 149 groups in 2008 to an all-time high of 1,360 in 2012.”

With Obama becoming P.O.T.U.S., more guns were sold in America than ever before in its history

The sole goal of the Republican Party and Tea baggers was destruction of Obama’s presidency.

Days before Obama’s inauguration, Rush Limbaugh declared, “I hope Obama fails.” Shortly after his inauguration, William Kristol told Republicans to deny Obama making history.

Kristol extoll, they must “find reasons to obstruct and delay. They should do their best not to permit Obama to rush his agenda through this year. They can’t allow Obama to make of 2009 what Franklin Roosevelt made of 1933 or Johnson of 1965.

In response to the debt ceiling crisis and corresponding debate, U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) stated, “My first choice was to do something important for the country. But my second obligation is to my party” and prevent President Obama from getting re-elected.

Against that background of orchestrated Republican acrimony and racial hate, Lupe Fiasco had the temerity to call President Barack Obama, “the biggest terrorist in the United States of America.”

To compound his ignorance; talk out the side of his neck just because he could, Fiasco avowed, “he doesn’t vote or get involved in politics.”

To reiterate Bomani Jones well-reasoned advice, “You are not obligated to speak simply because you are good at doing something…”

While the attention seeking beast that is social media often demands the sacrifice of astuteness and critical thinking for clicks, one does not always have to voice an opinion when asked or proffer one just to be in the mix — to speak simply because you are good at doing something…Especially, when the issues are race related and/or police related. A lesson NBA Hall of Famer Charles Barkley has repeated failed to learn.

Charles Barkley is known for his outspokenness on matters of race. His supposed candor is a misnomer. It is new-age minstrelsy and Uncle Tominism passing themselves off as courage to chastise “bad blacks.”

Charles Barkley is as ignorant as they come. See some of my evidenced here, here and here.

The serial offender latest act of “Knee-Growism” is to conflate issues and blame persons of African descent that have been the subject and victims of police barbarity, police racism and police oppression, ever since Africans were forcefully brought to the West — in chains.

In response to the recent shootings of Blacks by the police, Barkley declared, Black people have “to do better.” Then he qualifies it with, “You can’t demand respect from white people and the cops if we don’t respect each other.”

What does disrespect of one Black person to another has to do with the execution of racism by whites and others, the denial of Black humanity by whites and others, the verbal and/or physical abuse police frequently unleash on Blacks, the victimization of innocent Blacks by the police, the murders of Blacks, innocent of a crime at the time by the police, or the articulation that Black Lives Matter?

By Barkley’s logic, a prostitute is in no position to cry or claim rape.

While respect must indeed be inculcated in oneself before one seeks or demand it from others, that sort of respect is more or less on the personal level.

Living in a democratic society automatically comes with a number of espoused values and a number of entrenched rights. For example, the guarantee of equal treatment and equal protection before the law, citizens able to participate fully in the life of State, citizenry being free to live, work, and to pursue their dreams without racial, religious, or sexual let and hindrance — irrespective to one having or not having respect.

Racism, race bias and discrimination undermines the egalitarian principles of democracy. As such, one need not be of unimpeachable character to demand respect/fair treatment from ethnically different members that comprise as well as drive the larger society.

Policing is a public service. The police are paid from the public purse; by the taxes collected from citizens. Hence, the “protect and serve” slogan that’s entwined with policing.

While police officers are expected to be firm, tough, and to apply necessary force, even kill in execution of their duty, they are expected to follow departmental guidelines as to usage of their weapons, be courteous, respectful, and do their jobs in the spirit of fairness and impartiality.

Doing so accord the police with the trust and respect of the public they serve, as well as encourage citizens to be allies in their fight against crime and criminal elements.

Consequently, officers ought not to criminalize the communities they serve, by dismissive of the rights of citizens; opting to trample on them, because they could — and have gotten away with it, or use their weapon as a first rather than a last resort.

Fact: the jeremiad of police abuses, police brutality and unnecessary police killings of First Nations people and people of African descent is extremely long. Subsequently, there is little to no reasons for Blacks to trust and respect the police. Still, the police are expected to respect Blacks.

The Black Lives Matter movement isn’t asking for special treatment of the race or for criminal behaviour by Blacks to be excused, just for the application of fairness.

Without change, the pregnancy of racism, the criminalization of Blacks, racial profiling, habitual race-based police harassment, police brutality and the failure to punish officers over their acts of criminality, make it easier for those marginalised and discriminated against to be predisposed to undermine social stability, to be recruited in gangs, and for cold-hearted criminals, anarchists, terrorists, and cop haters/cop killers like Micah Johnson and Gavin Eugene Long to be birthed.

While many of our individual despair, and by extension that of the race are of our own making, Charles Barkley should be one of the last persons to mouth “we could do better.”

In early 2007, I watched Charles Barkley on Jay Leno defend his gambling losses of millions of dollars. (Barkley excitingly revealed he won $100,000 on the Super Bowl.)

Barkley explained that he was the one that put in the work; that worked his butt off to acquire his money. The inference being it is nobody’s business how he spends his hard-earned money. And lamented that when he made it, one set of “pumpkin-vine” relations came out the woodwork. Ostensibly, looking for handouts.

Inasmuch as his appearance coincided with the financial controversy in the aftermath of Anna Nicole Smith’s death, Barkley’s attitude was more or less, it was better for him to spend his money than have people fighting over it when he is dead.

To hear such perspective coming out of the mouth of Mr. Barkley was mind-boggling and shocking. I immediately lost all respect for Charles Barkley.

I thought my people had longed moved away from that attitude born out of self-contempt and selfishness, or if it resided among us, it was in the souls of lost and much older folks. To hear a young man like Barkley espousing such ignorance…

Money is not just something to spend. Money is a tool, a weapon.

Money has the power to institute change.

Given the well-documented high level of consumerism by Blacks, if we make our money our politics we can build institutions and businesses, enrich community, force change, and take a huge bite out of racism and discrimination.

Barkley publicly revealed on Jay Leno that he wasn’t interested in the intergenerational transfer of property; tangible legacies like land, property, business and money for the next generation to build on – that are essential in the empowerment of a people and community, or contributing to the commonwealth of Blackness.

Barkley expressed he was going to enjoy excess; spend his money as he sees fit — fulfil that “happy go lucky” Black jester stereotype. Is it any wonder Charles Barkley is frequently given the mic?

To Rectify Damage, Reverse Our Paralysis (Part 3)

Black public figures are just as opened to bias and discrimination as any of us…


(Part 3)

By N Oji Mzilikazi

Originally appeared in the Montreal Community Contact Volume 24, Number 12 June 12, 2014

What is the purpose of education for the children of enslavement and colonialism who bear multitudinous psychological, educational and economical scars from centuries of inhumane and unbridled exploitation, torturous suffering, dehumanization, racism, discrimination and hatred, if not to make us whole?

Yet the scars of colonialism; internalized racism and self-hate have many believing it’s all about becoming privilege, being a cut above others of the race, achieving “white gaze” – validation and approval of whites – escaping the constraints racism placed on Blackness.

Thus the colonial mentality of mothers telling sons as they’re off to college, university, or on obtaining a “good” job: “I doh want no pickey-head grandchild hair to comb. Marry a girl with straight hair, marry a light skin girl.”

That mentality is not confined to West Indians. Many professional African American sportsmen have married white, and not to white females they went to school with, but girls they met in a bar, or worked in a bar, or in a dead-end job, had no leg up on education, and whose only quality was whiteness.They’d pass on the sister in the bar, even when educated, because her skin colour opens no doors, and their children wouldn’t have mixed-race, light skin privilege.

Even though education elevates, it does not immunize Blacks from the violence and harm of racism.

In 2011, Karine Joizil, a lawyer of Haitian descent was chosen to be the Liberal Party candidate in the Montreal riding of Laval-les-Îles. The Quebec Hellenic Congress sent a letter counselling its members who traditionally vote Liberal, not to vote for the Party in the riding because Joizil is not of Greek origin. They were advised to support another candidate, another party.

Still, there are persons that enjoy using certification, that have weaponize their education as a tool to belittle, exploit or oppress  fellow Blacks, instead of assisting or liberating the race.

What is the purpose of education for people of African descent if not to decolonize our mind, reclaim our humanity, reclaim voice, reclaim personal and racial self-esteem, reclaim agency, take control of our own destiny, pursue empowerment in all areas, build institutions and strong communities, bring respect to the race, and to challenge the culture of white supremacy and whiteness as the hegemonic narrative so we can have an equitable society?

To believe in anything else including “making it” and becoming wealthy is delusional, as well as betrays ignorance in regards to how deep white supremacy, anti-Blackness, and keeping Blacks poor have been institutionalization.

The facts are that Black success is only tolerated, never fully endorsed, and undermined at the drop of a dime.

Neither making it nor having loads of money was able to save Michael Jackson, Janet Jackson when Justin Timberlake exposed her breast, Oprah when she endorsed Barack Obama’s candidacy, Tiger Woods over his affairs, Serena Williams over her outburst at the US Open, Kobe Bryant when accused of rape, Puffy Coombs when going around with Jennifer Lopez and a gun was found in the vehicle, and Michael Vick over dogfighting claims, just to name a few. The backlash driven by racism was swift and brutal.

Barack Obama made it – to the highest office in America, yet obstructionist polices and mischaracterization driven by the politics of racism; people who believe they are divinely and inherently superior and better than Obama, colour everything he does or wants to do.

There have been race-inspired plots to assassinate Obama, pastors that delivered sermons with pleas for his death, and second and third grade students on a school bus in Idaho chanting “assassinate Obama.”

There were the bumper stickers: “Pray for Obama: Psalm 109:8.” When checked out the verse reads: “Let his days be few; and let another take his office.” Also, “Don’t Re-Nig in 2012,” and written in smaller print under it: “Stop repeat offenders. Don’t reelect Obama!”

The magic wand of racism is truly miraculous.

Jean Charest, the former Liberal premier of Quebec was once a member of the Conservative Party. Charest was recruited by Liberals to take over the reins of the Quebec Liberal Party. When Charest switched parties, he didn’t face recriminations from former Conservative allies or called a traitor. They were happy for him.

According to varied press reports, Haitian-born Michaëlle Jean and her husband (white) were closet sympathizers to Quebec separatist/sovereignist cause. When Jean was nominated to be Canada’s governor-general, one would think that members of the Bloc Québécois, the Péquistes and other separatists groups would’ve been happy to see her move up the political ladder. After all, they knew where her true sympathies lie. That was not the case.

Appointed governor-general, Jean was denigrated, called “reine nègre – negro queen.” The Bloc Québécois under the leadership of Gilles Duceppe issued a press release saying they would boycott her swearing-in ceremony. They considered the position of governor-general archaic.

In 1999, Duceppe and company had no problem being present for the swearing-in of Adrienne Clarkson as governor-general, but when it came Michaëlle Jean’s turn…

Le Devoir is a pro-sovereignist newspaper. One of its November 2005 editorial suggested that Governor-General Michaëlle Jean was becoming an international embarrassment to Canada, and advised her to shut up.

In nothing short of disguised racism, some veteran members of The Royal Canadian Legion said they planned to show their displeasure with Governor-General Michaëlle Jean’s unconfirmed but assumed support for Quebec separatist movement by turning their backs to her, at the upcoming November 2005 Remembrance Day ceremony in Ottawa.

Even if Michaëlle Jean held separatist sentiments, her acceptance of the governor general position was of itself renunciation of separatist views, so why the fuss?

Throughout all the opposition to Michaëlle Jean’s appointment and attacks on her, none ever questioned her qualifications. Education was no saving grace… Michaëlle Jean’s political bent was just a smoke screen; her skin color was the real issue.

Who have been the friends of our diverse Black and Caribbean community? Who have ever looked out for our interest? Yet, rather than recognize that we are fighting the same fight, the same enemies, we turn on each other and view one another as competitors.

So, what is the purpose of education for West Indians and people of African descent if not to put an end to our infighting, affirm we are allied in the same struggle, and to be morally courageous, fearless, and committed to community?

Yolande James is the daughter of English-speaking West Indians. Though bilingual, James is English, therefore Anglophone.

When Yolande James won the Neligan riding, and became the first Black woman to be elected to the Quebec’s National Assembly, Gazette columnist, Don Macpherson in his September 22, 2004, column, Kick me – I’m a West Island Liberal, described James as Premier Charest hand puppet.

In one fell swoop, Macpherson used a loaded and highly pejorative term to erase James education, qualifications, and worthiness.

Dehumanization and the erasure and nothingness it engenders go hand in hand with racism. (Throughout her political career, Macpherson and the Gazette displayed anti-James bias.)

In 2007, Charest appointed Yolande James,Minister of Immigration and Cultural Communities, making James the youngest cabinet minister ever, the first Black minister in Quebec, and the only Anglophone minister in the cabinet.

With James a cabinet minister, none could claim that Quebec’s Anglophone community wasn’t being served, or that no ethnic community, visible minority, or cultural community was represented in government. But in keeping with white supremacist culture that seeks our erasure, dehumanizes and refuses to accept that people of African descent are fully human, capable of leadership and the reins of power and responsibility, James appointment was characterized as a betrayal to Anglophones.

Macpherson was incensed that James was picked over several more seasoned colleagues. He pointed out that James is not yet 30 and had been a member of the National Assembly for less than three years.”In other words, James was young and inexperienced – the same case made against Barack Obama when he decided to run for the US presidency.

The Suburban and The Chronicle newspapers were awash with articles and letters critical of James and her appointment. In The Chronicle, Martin Barry quoted Liberal MNA Russell Copeman, Jewish, saying the formation of the new cabinet will result in a backlash in the English-speaking community.

Allen Nutik, Jewish, declared the cabinet’s makeup was insulting to English-speaking voters, and launched Affiliation Quebec, a new political party for those dissatisfied (Code for privilege and angry Jewish, and white males.) with the Liberal Party in Quebec.

Racists have more tricks than the famed Harry Houdini had. Thus, Quebec’s100,000 plus English speaking Black/West Indian/Caribbean community – Anglophones that overwhelmingly vote Liberal, were suddenly insignificant, invisible and unimportant.

In support of white privilege, our presence and votes were not configured to count.

Haitian-born Claudel Toussaint was chairman of the Parti Québécois (PQ) committee on ethno-cultural relations. In 2001, Claudel Toussaint represented the PQ in the provincial by-election for the Mercier riding. Since 1976 the Mercier riding was a Péquiste stronghold, yet Toussaint didn’t win the seat. The PQ faithful decided to vote race before party.

How do we navigate and raise our game?

Conclusion in the next issue

Boston Bruins goaltender Tim Thomas: What An Arsehole!

Boston Bruins goaltender Tim Thomas: What An Arsehole!

By N Oji Mzilikazi

January 24, 2012

It’s a long-standing tradition for the winning teams of America’s major league sports to visit the White House and meet the President. The Boston Bruins won Hockey’s Stanley Cup in 2011, its first since 1972. Their White House visit was scheduled for January 23, 2012.

Bruins goaltender Tim Thomas, the playoff MVP and winner of the Conn Smythe Trophy decided to put his politics ahead of the team. He refused to join his teammates at the White House.

His asinine statement on the NHL website, couching his hatred for President Barack Obama included, “the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the rights, liberties, and property of the people.”

George W. Bush spent 8 years in office. It was under Bush’s reign that anti-terror legislation and the like started to undermine civil liberties.

Obama inherited a system that was in a deficit, a tailspin and full of holes. Obama succeeded in bringing about the demise of Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the biggest act of terrorism on American soil. Obama succeeded in bringing American troops home from Bush’s ill-advised and illegal war in Iraq.

And Thomas dares to act as if Obama is responsible for the pickle jar America has found itself in. Tim Thomas is an arsehole with a capital A.