@Iyallah. Did see the documentary and seen it and several other before. Seen Sharpton when he came to London and met him privately.

@Kingdomglobal and Ijexa. Wrote a response last night and the damn thing disappeared. I am sympathetic to both positions don’t agree with Ijexa’s language in describing Sharpton but agree with fundamental position. Don’t think the invective helps what is potentially an important discussion.

1. Sharpton is a product of the civil rights campaigning model or approach to social change and consequently many of his tactics may be understood in that context. For example his showmanship and style to a certain degree.


2. Ijexa is wrong where he infers Sharpton has no background or track record of serious work. Sharpton has an honourable CV of hard organising, fundraising and campaigning on a range of issues important to the African American community. Which I can guarenteee is no picnic in the park. We don’t have to agree with someone to acknowledge their record of hard work activism and leadership on particular issue.

3.Sharpton has a bad press. But what black leader has a good press in the white mainstream? The focus of the white press when dealing with leaders who are not complementary to white interest is to seek to discredit, or to blame. Sharpton has made or been involved with things which have not gone well. A case in point being the Tawna Brawley case, but this had little really to do with Sharpton if it is claimed the sister’s story did not check out. The criticism that he is opportunistic, is itself opportuntistic.

Given the type of work or area which Sharpton is involved or interested in eg campaigning against racism and injustices seeking to skilfully exploit opportunities is part of his remit. If police brutalise a black man, it his job once weighting up to pros and cons to see how much political milage he can get from it. So the charges of him being opportunistic is usually a racist double standard, because he is in the business of community politics and if a white man was as skilled he would be called a genius.

Another example of the foolishness charged against Sharpton is he was responsible vicariously for someone going into the Jewish shop and shooting somebody. Well by the same standard they should arrest people like Rudy Gulliano, Police Chief Daryl Gates and a whole heap of high profiled whites for Bernard Getz going to a New York subway and shooting a group on innocent black men killing and crippling them for life, on the basis he thought they were going to attack him and why he was walking around a place far away from where he lives armed to the teeth with high powered automatic weapons concealed and specially modified bullets to cause permanent and maximum injuries.

No white is going to be held to account and worse that Jew is still walking around, talking about it and looking forward to drawing a pension. With all the guns in the black community in the US taking black life but Getz is still walking and breathing. So much for the G Unit…But Sharpton was at the front of the Bernard Getz issue and I commend him for it.

4.Has Sharpton’s decision to enter the Presidential campaign weakened his politics and my answer is no. I have watched him on an ongoing basis on US cable and his performance at various debates has been top draw and uncompromising on fundamentals, his critique of the Iraq war, socio economic policy, racism and inequality has been merciless.

There is an important difference between Sharptons and J Jackson’ bid. Jackson is a moderate/accommodationist who talks tough and militant when necessary. Sharpton is not a moderate, who can talk accommodating when necessary, as he is now. Understanding people’s basic instincts as opposed to what they may talk, is fundamental when assessing people.

I saw a very revealing incident at a Black Caucus sponsored meeting on the Democratic Party’s nominees. During the discussion some white anti Howard Dean’s activists decided to boo and jeer and attempt to wreck his speech. After being told god know how many times by the sister who was the chair to behave themselves ,which they ignored. Security[white were called] but many still carried on. I don’t know what mickey mouse Democratic machine Security they had on the night.

But Sharpton lost his cool and grabbed the mike and told the Democratic Party hierarchy and people present, that this behaviour was disrespectful of the Black Caucus and black people and he noticed that this was not the first time, these white fools were allowed to disrupt with what seemed impunity and if they could not get their shit together they had brothers in New York who got Security down pat who the Black Caucus would bring down and teach these white boys walking around in suits how to do security.

The whites on the panel were were very uncomfortable and Joe Lieberman made a “joke� that he hoped Sharpton didn’t bring any brothers to fix him. But they all had to back him and agree that this behaviour was out of order and disrespectful as black people don’t go to white forums and play the arse. But in that instance you could see Sharpton’s instincts. Braun who I generally “like� sat there looking lost. The man did not care that the world’s camera’s were there or forgot, which I doubt, but you could see in a second where Sharpton’s psychological base and paradigmn is on certain fundamentals.

Even though coming from Civil Rights background, being younger than Jacson, Sharpton also heavily influenced by the black power and more radical orienation. This was clearly seen in that instance because most hard core grassroots organisations would not tolerate whites playing the arse in their house for one second.


5. Having said the above do I think Sharpton’s decision to run for the Presidentail nomination a good move? Absolutely not and here is where me and Ijexa are one. I think the decision by Sharpton is criminally negligent, a betrayal; and even potentially self serving.

Despite the civility between Jackson and Sharpton in public they are in competition and as Ijexa is right for the sole position in the white man’s model of planation politics. What is the range of outcomes if Sharpton does well, given he will never get what he formally proclaims to want? A seat at the masters table pleading for his people, as the white man only wants to talk to one ****** preacher leader at a time.

Given the amount of resources ,money , time and energy and good will needed to runs such a campaign Sharpton’s actions are a betrayal, for diverting such important resources away from its proper and priority purpose directed internally at the community, rather than externally in something that we know willl bring us little and will cost us a great deal and where there is no incurring positive interest only mounting additional costs.

Africans in the US, or here, do not need another black person who is eloquent at "spitting on the mike", we have plenty. As the great Amilicar Carbral probably our best theorist on leadership, organisation and struggle said, the struggle is not a fight or competition to be on the radio, or television or newsprint. The struggle is first and foremostly with the people, amongst the people and for the people, as “rice never cooks outside the pot, only in it�.

We need people who care less about publicity and showboating, or great oratory, even though all these things are needed in due course. We need people who I call engineers, mechanics, technicians and solidiers who specialise in building, creating, repairing institutions, structures, programmes, mechanism designed to build the critical and strategic infrastructure without which no army can move, or no train can run,never mind reaching on time. A general is a head of an intricate organisational machinery and not one man armies.

The white man attacked and undermined systematically almost every serious African institution in the US; regardless of the self destructive tendencies amongst us which assist this process and priority number 1 to 100 has to be to reconstruct and build those institutions. Sharpton’s resources would be better spent focused on building one specific programme, institutions etc which is more beneficial in the short,medium and long term than all this prancing around wasting our resources.

The kind of exemplary leadership we need to follow is that of brothers in the CIBI[Confederation of Independent Black Instituions] led by outstanding and committed solidiers like Hanibal T Afrik, Jitu Weisu, Adeyemi Bandelle, Haki R Madhubuti, Jawanza Kunjufu and many more I could site who most people never heard of. Why because they are too busy and only come out when big things kick off and they have to give their weight to big time collective action eg Million Man March etc.

They are too busy and have been for decades, creating independent Black school systems, which boasts wicked schools like Marcus Garvey High, kindergartens, supplementary schools, homework clubs, Boys To Men Initiation Programmes, black businesses, publishing companies and serious things. Things which will produce quality boys and girls, soldiers and leaders and has a positive multiplier effect.

Do you know how powreful a simple study group is and what two learned and skilled and committed people can achieve simpy by six hours or even less a week? Do you know how many quality people we produced from such low key and critical work? Our people are hungry for quality info and education. You don't need any big building. This is what we need.

For example the quiet and low key work of the founders of Blacknet, and those who make it possible at every level, is strategically of more consequence for the future of our people than all the speeches from idiots like David Lammie[some Black fool here Kingdom]. Blacknet is a critical part of our infrastructure, which in due course will come under systematic attack to shut it down or limit its capability and that is a fact, because it is very very important and has serious implications.

The work which Kingdom is doing in terms of business and entrepreneurial activities, is critical and moves to a higher level once he has mastered the basics and can teach others and work collectively with others creating an infrastructure for making money. The work my group and network carry out on a daily basis has far more significance than anything that takes place in our local council, or any shit the average black councillor is chatting.

We just need Ijexa to get his own team together and we will really be cooking. Ijexa we need some collective thought on IT defence strategies for those who want to attack our systems. Not talking about little kids but serious actors who will take down our systems when we are getting too powerful for their liking. My folks have given the issue some thought but pressing work and timetables limits the amount of time they can spend on it to exhaust the matter. But we have long made the assessment about the threats which we will face in this regards.

Can I end with an example from history which I always remember about what are the key priorities of our people and those who occupy positions of leadership or potential leadership. During one of the aborted attempt of revolution in Russia, which went pear shaped and the Secret Police were hunting down the revolutionaries killing, arresting or forcing them out of the country, and systematically destroying their elaborate organisational structures and networks. Lenin who was hiding in Sweden, Trotsky the genius on all things, including organisation was in hiding elsewhere.

The only soldier and rank left in the country was Stalin. However, Lenin was confident, that once Stalin was alive and safe all was not lost. Why because he knew Stalin had the ability to slowly but surely and quietly rebuild the organisational machinery, which he did. What he did with it is another discussion. But it was the quiet and dedicated work of Stalin which actually laid the groundwork for the great come back which took them to the Winter Palace and change world history forever.


---------------------------------------------------------
@ Ijexa I wanted to make this point to Kunjufu in our discussion on Leadership Thread, which is DIRECTLY RELEVENT, but he did not come back to me. He mentioned political leadership in this country and how certain rouges have in effect seized the mantle of black radicalism and disgraced it.

What I never told him was that was a political decision taken by experienced soldiers and leaders, to allow particular fools to grab the mike and let them have it. After the shock, or realising particular inexperienced and untested people hungry for mike and radio interviews let them have it that was our view. In fact some had been tested and found very wanting. These are not instution builders, but talkers. They can't even keep a team of five brothers together and if you can't do that you ain't no leader pal. A string of passerbys or fans are not a team.

Because if we wanted to remove them a couple of brothers attending one of their meetings would end their rein in from the off. In fact as soon as any of our people they recognise attend their functions they get sweaty and jumpy and why we send recongised people every now and again to unsettle them. We are still around. Ain’t gone anywhere.

So we can use these people for our own collective ends. They want the mike let them have it. You see when you like the mike and are constantly responding to requests you cannot build anything of consequence. Let them broadcast themselves to the world with no serious infrastructural back up.

Let tapes of their inflammatory speeches be sent to their employers. Let Special Branch and Intelligence Services open a file on who they think may be able to rouse the people if serious shit kicks off. Fine by us. We simply keep working away doing what has to be done and living normal routine lives raising children building families, making saving money and doing what has to be done in a very low key way. But building piece by piece block by block, unit by unit, team by team.

Every now and again, send brothers to these meetings and make note and evaluate the situation come back and report. We monitor who is talking what in our political ideological areas. We know on any subject we have brothers who would bury these people and take what serious or critical support they have and will increase it many fold.

The arguments on particular issues which come up here on the Forum can be analysed, improved on and many which I use come from people who know their stuff on certain issues. So all in all fools serve a purpose, to take heat, fly the flag on key issues and allow us to assess their capacity, knowing when ready we can send people who will kill them on any argument or issue with style. But you need good machinery which integrates and coordinate the people and its leaders and heads of groups, programmes and initiatives.

So people like Sharpton actually serve to divert fire and attention from often much more serious things taking place in a low key manner. But the tragedy in his case is he diverts too much communal resources in a non productive end.


Fred