Can Blacks use the law of discovery to carve out new territory and capital?

One of the failures of black leadership is its unwillingness to pursue a truly self-interested agenda for the people they allegedly represent. The current narrative of assimilation does not work. It puts blacks in an unequal and weak position compared to whites and other non-white populations who have pursued a capital acquisition policy first versus a political empowerment/assimilation approach still preferred by most blacks. It never discusses in any significant way the acquisition of productive capital around which communities can be built. Rather, the assimilationist argument centers on fluffy subjects such as social justice, membership of degreed blacks on the boards of white-owned corporations, and affirmative action in the workplace and in colleges and universities.

To be fair, a number of grass roots advocates do bring up the topic of access to capital by black-owned firms, but the problem is that business capital, whether in the form of loanable funds or equity investment is small compared to the number of black businesses in need of funding. Also, there is the risk that terms and conditions underlying the funding of black enterprise firms may not representative of the black population primarily because the boards that direct these underwriters are probably not members of the community in the first place. Just take a look at the names and faces of the members of the typical executive committee or board of directors and you see my point.

Blacks, as a people, simply are not calling their own shots. If you listen to the rhetoric of current black political leaders, liberty and freedom as it pertains to capital, are not a part of the lexicon. Black political leadership is more concerned with keeping blacks available to vote for white Democratic Party candidates as opposed to self-reliance. Probably in the minds of black political leadership, self-reliance would be akin to self-determination or nationalism and these leaders are afraid that such an approach would sever their attachment to America. But the attachment to America is false one, as I have argued before, because blacks did not come here voluntarily and apply the law of discovery.

To summarize Chief Justice John Marshall, the European came to North America but while acknowledging its Native American occupants, the law of discovery, of showing up first, gave title to the country making the discovery. That Native Americans were there first was irrelevant. Once, say England, made its discovery of what would later become the United States, it created a title that excluded claims by any other European power. Establishing this “title” over the land meant of course establishing control over its natural resources; land, air, water, minerals, the stuff that supports production, transportation, communications, energy generation and distribution.

To the activities that land, water, air, minerals, paid, indentured, and enslaved labor supported, the European was able to attach “coin”; to monetize. He would later create a centralized banking system to underwrite his government’s issue of debt as well as serve as the lender of last resort to commercial banks. The European’s financial system would, in conjunction with public sector investment, underwrite technological innovations that would further spur the design and production of consumer goods and services.

Blacks have been left largely out of the ownership of productive capital in the American political economy and as I have discussed in previous posts, it is too late and probably impractical to attempt any action under the laws of discovery for the purpose of acquiring the natural resources that underpin an economy that would support 43 million people on a self-sustainable, self-reliant way. But I do not think this is impossible.

Cyberspace provides “territory” that blacks can conquer and extract capital from. From the time I immigrated to the mainland I have always believed that blacks had the intellectual resources to construct their own vibrant economy. It boils down to a willingness of the black population to use broadband technology to connect to and import resources from outside of the United States and mixing those resources with the access to land, air, minerals, and water that blacks have here in the United States. It means the black population using its engineering skills to build a renewable energy infrastructure that provides electricity to its population. It means building communications networks using unlicensed to spectrum to tie black households to basic services. It means using the black population’s legal talent to advocate for laws that protect the importation of items into the United States that can be processed by plants designed and built in the U.S. by black engineers. It means using financial talent to reinvest these proceeds back into the black population and further growing its resources and income.

The great thing about applying the “law of discovery” to cyberspace is that no one has to be kicked out or enslaved. There is still plenty of territory to carve up; to reverse colonize but this time with equitable results.

Roseanne Barr, Valerie Jarrett, the Deplorables, and Safety Pins

Roseanne Barr made some unflattering remarks about Valerie Jarrett, a former aide to former President Barack Obama. The actress, best known for the ABC production, Roseanne, tweeted that Ms Jarrett was the spawn of an Egyptian political group, the Muslim Brotherhood, and “the planet of the apes.”  ABC’s response was swift, a cancellation of the reboot of the popular 1990s situation comedy. Ms Barr went the apology route but it was a path taken too late as far as ABC was concerned.

Social media and traditional media have been on fire all day as some people expressed how they were offended by the remarks while others came to Ms Barr’s defense. The posturing was to be expected. What I also expected was that no one in the press has so far addressed three political questions. One, what is racism? Two, must blacks always have liberal whites come to their rescue with safety pins? Three, how will rural deplorables react?

The definition of racism has gone through a simpleton devolution over the past four decades. Once upon a time, racism referred to a systemic and systematic application of rules and conduct designed to deprive a class of people of social, economic, and political standing based on a narrative that their race was inferior to the race of the ruling class. While name calling and insults are expected to swirl around the social and institutional constructs that put discriminatory rules in place, name calling and insults alone did not necessarily translate into racism. Not only do you need hate, you also need emotional, legal, and physical power to deploy an infrastructure that relegates people to a second or third-class position. You need the power of the state, a state action to implement a racist infrastructure. I would argue that Ms Barr’s actions never arose to racism and no state action was present.

To be Muslim is to be an adherent of Islam, a religion, not a race. As for the phrase, “planet of the apes”, blacks in America have been referred to as monkeys for centuries. Neither Ms Jarrett, myself, or the almost one billion people who refer to themselves as black consider ourselves monkeys; therefore, the insult remains with Ms Barr. So why would the name calling arise above just that, name calling? It arises in part because liberal whites need to push the “safety pin” issue.

In the U.S., liberal whites started a safety pin campaign in 2016 where the pin symbolized a safe place for people afraid of President-elect Donald Trump. Mr Trump has come to represent for some Americans a resurgence of American racism and intolerance. Today’s reaction on social media by liberal whites indicates that they are willing and ready to incorporate Ms Barr’s comments in their overall campaign to paint the current economic and political climate as so toxic that nothing less than extinguishing Republican control of Congress, state legislatures, and governorships will be accepted.

Ms Barr’s support of Mr Trump probably didn’t help her cause with her critics or ABC.  I am not a fan of Ms Barr or either itineration of her show but based on television ratings for the Roseanne reboot cited in published reports, Ms Barr seems to have made a connection with low-income conservative middle America. And that leads to my third question, how will the “Trump Deplorables” react?

Scott D. Pierce argues that one cannot say definitively that Ms Barr’s TV character is truly conservative but Ms Barr is another story. How well do low-income white conservative viewers relate to the show, I do not know. There is the potential for Ms Barr to really go rogue and use her celebrity and social media platform to spread her arguably radical conservative narrative.

ABC may have let the genie loose.

Fifty years after MLK’s death, the civil rights movement has become a revenue stream for event planners

I don’t know if it is still done, but I remember watching some movie filmed in black and white where in one scene there was an attractive white girl walking around with a box strapped in front of her containing cigarette cartons. She would use her voice, smile, and good looks to charm the men in the room into buying a cancer stick or two. From a consumer perspective this type of traction creation for marketing and selling product is standard operation.  I see it when good looking women are pictured on magazine covers laying on the top of race cars. I see it at conferences when the best looking bartenders are placed behind the cash bar. I see it when a pretty face women is placed at the receptionist desk of an office or at the registration table of an event.

An event planner realizes that her staff responsible for connecting with clients must be able to create a level of trust and comfort such that the client pays attention to what the event’s sponsors are selling. The sponsors want event planners to weave the sponsors’ products into an event’s theme creating exposure of the product’s benefits to the prospective consumer. The greater the exposure to the product, the greater the likelihood of a sale in the short or immediate term.

In politics, political messages are the products pushed through partisan politics channels. Those messages ask tax payers to vote for a particular candidate or support some policy. Today’s post Martin Luther King civil rights movement has become an event planning channel for partisan messages from the left. Some of the “event planners” are familiar to some of you: the NAACP, the National Urban League, the National Action Network, the National Rainbow Coalition. Others have emerged over the past decade such as Color of Change and Black Lives Matter. Their business model is simple. Led by a bunch of college educated black elites, they invite people from the black masses to participate in forums, panel discussions, parades, etc., where they can discuss issues impacting the “black community.” During these forums they intertwine the messages of the progressive left and then close with calls to action, including during an election season, a call for blacks to vote for liberals.

During Dr King’s time, civil rights leaders exchanged information and inspiration in their church meetings. Other than planting a bug in a church (I wouldn’t be surprised if the FBI did this often), you couldn’t “hack” these meetings unless you convinced civil rights leaders that it was important for you, especially as a non-white, to attend. Contrary to the images you saw on “Mississippi Burning”, of helpless blacks dependent on the white man to get him through, black Americans were very resourceful in addressing and pressing their grievances on their own.

Today they have been convinced that a “go it alone” approach is not feasible. By relying less on their own resources, blacks have opened themselves up the carpet bagging of liberals who have sold them on a new corporate model where the black civil rights movement is underwritten by the Democratic Party and other progressive groups. There is a price to pay for the underwriting. The price is a dilution of message.

Now civil rights has extended to groups that quite frankly don’t need civil rights attention or protection: white women, other ethnic groups, and the LGBTQ communities. Black Americans have been pushed so far down to the bottom of the civil rights ladder that they are a fossilized movement, compressed by the weight of all the other communities that have managed to get ahead of them that today, just like the fossils of dead dinosaurs and mammals, they are fueling the civil and human rights campaigns of everyone else.

Martin Luther King’s death removed any last viability of a movement that was moving its focus toward economic empowerment. The movement opted to go the route of political empowerment, falling for its glamour and surface glitz. That power has traditionally been urban based, but as whites return to core cities and old black neighborhoods gentrify, that power is quickly eroding. Fifty years after his death, all the black civil rights movement may have going for it is putting another event on a calendar.

The Caribbean as dumping ground for sovereign independents

Current residents of the #Caribbean should consider that the goal of those accepting citizenship by investment or pursuing policies of population reduction as a recovery policy post Hurricanes Irma y Maria may have as an end game the creation of independent jurisdictions that support sovereign individualism.

By combining cryptocurrency, renewable energy, and tax exempt jurisdiction schemes, such off-grid independence can be created for the wealthy. Declining liberal welfare nation-states such as the United States and the United Kingdom will serve as the dumping ground for Caribbean nationals who cannot push back against the onslaught of invading #capital entering the Caribbean under the initial disguise of “seeking a better life, diversity, and getting a deeper tan”, the bulwarks of gentrification.

Be mindful of the invader reciting the mantra peace, love, and soul as her agenda. Those were merely the closing words of a TV show. It is the nightmare of the horror movie of cultural usurpation that you should be concerned about…

America doesn’t have a race problem. Blacks have an expectations problem

Black people expect to be loved. A couple days ago I was standing in a cashier line at a neighborhood grocery. A man ahead of me lamented to the cashier that whites were trickling in to the majority black West End section of Atlanta. He found their perceived behavior toward him and other blacks disturbing. “They look at us as if to say, ‘Why are you here?'” The cashier responded, “Well, they can’t make you move?”

The cashier is right in that blacks cannot be forced to move, but the reality of the economy is that more blacks in West End may have to as Atlanta’s political economy continues to experience demographic shifts. More whites are moving to the Atlanta metropolitan area and the core city can no longer be referred to as “Chocolate City.” It is increasingly mocha, strawberry, and vanilla.

To the gentleman who was line with me, he probably perceives that whites have a distaste for dark chocolate. To some white palates the taste of chocolate is bitter and for many blacks this signals a race problem. If, as a black person, I am not accepted by whites, then there is a national problem with race. I don’t think so. Rather, I argue that white society’s attitude towards blacks is in keeping with their expectations as to how the American political economy is supposed to work. Black expectations as to being accepted and loved holds no water because blacks were never a part of the American political economy’s marketing plan from the beginning.

Citing data from the Federal Reserve, The Washington Post reported last October that one in seven whites in America had a net worth of one million dollars versus one in fifty black Americans enjoying the same status. What is more telling is that the percentage of white households enjoying this status has doubled over the last 25 years while the percentage of black households worth at least a million has remained stagnant during this same period.

I wouldn’t expect many whites to be shocked at this number. They will be the first to tell you that this is a result of hard work and discipline mixed in with a little luck. They and their ancestors took the opportunity provided them in this land to increase their wealth and income. Blacks, they might argue, did not.

And these expectations and attitudes are reinforced by real social networks. Citing research from the Public Religion Research Institute, The Washington Post reported that out of 100 friends, the average white person will have 91 white friends and one black friend. Blacks are a bit more friendlier. Out of 100 friends, 83 are black and eight are white.

Blacks, in my opinion, expect the creed as expressed in either the airy words of Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence or Dr Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech to be lived up to, especially in the 21st century where the United States has elected a president of East African descent and descendants of slaves imported from West Africa now have multi-million dollar sport contracts and hundreds of vice-presidents in corporate human resources departments driving a BMW or a Mercedes Benz.

But even with the lofty speeches and the one-zee, two-zees of Black material success, full incorporation into the American political economy has not occurred and won’t because an invitation was never issued to blacks. For whites, race is not a problem not only because they don’t see race as they have done a good job creating an exclusive bubble but because the liquor flowing from the open bar that was promised to them is still flowing their way. The social contract between whites and the American political economy is still being honored.

Blacks should expect no real love ….

Social programs. Money laundered through the Great Unwashed

America needs poverty. Poverty eradication proposals are head fakes. America, especially the America that was created right after the Civil War, would not be where it is today without poor people.

Since the industrial revolution, and definitely as America entered the information age in the 1960s, the products designed and built by highly educated, highly paid labor had to be consumed by a large mass of “dependents.” These people are typically wage earners who do not have the capability to be self-sufficient and hold little to no capital. The greater the mass of consumers, the larger the network used to deliver goods. The larger the network to deliver goods means the higher educated, higher paid laborer and entrepreneur faced lower costs for delivering goods.

Emancipation, reconstruction, and the Jim Crow era coincided with the growth of consumerism. The American political economy, not knowing what to do with freed slaves was willing, in lieu of distributing productive capital to them, to turn them into a mass of consumers, with a willing cadre of banks and bond holders willing to launder money through “social welfare” programs.

The food stamp program? An opportunity for bond holders to launder money by financing a program whose clearinghouses are administered by banks.

Affordable housing programs? An opportunity for bond holders to finance the construction of low cost homes with principal and interest guaranteed by taxpayers, many of whom are not in the upper ten percent.

Medicaid and Medicare? Again, bond holders are offered a guarantee that taxpayers will provide a backstop for premium payments while insurance companies collect fees for administering them i.e. WellStar and Medicaid in Georgia.

There is a reason why the poor are referred to as the Great Unwashed. It is because dirty money is laundered through their misery.

A New #Republicanism: Value-based connection between tribes is all the “#diversity” we need

A friend and I were shopping at a farmers’ market in Dekalb County, Georgia yesterday. I enjoy the atmosphere in that market, an atmosphere containing multiple languages and dialects; different ethnic groups and races. The happy-go-lucky liberal would argue that what I saw was an example of people coming together as one to participate freely in commerce as one. To that I would say, bullshit.

What I saw and enjoyed was that multiple ethnic groups could go to that store and find items sold in lanes that catered to a particular culture’s tastes. There was no attempt at fusion, at trying to melt people into one pot for the purpose of creating some “universal multi-chrome of social mush.” Differences were actually respected.

I get the feeling that the left doesn’t get this. Rather than strengthening institutions that support these differences, that create the lanes that say being different is expected, the left argues that we are all “one”; that we are “equal.”  I don’t know what world liberals live in, but I would argue, based on the configuration of that store and the body language of the shoppers, that separate lanes were not only appreciated but demanded.

Saying that I am equal to or the same as a blonde white girl is insulting. The universal multi-chrome of social mush model that espouses this nonsense erases her background and my background from discussion. It ignores the different perspectives from which we view the world. The model dilutes us. As unique people spawned by unique peoples, we owe it to ourselves and our tribes to promote our uniqueness as much as possible, whether through marriage, voting, work, or art.

This runs counter to liberal government, an institution that would rather you stifle your own uniqueness than remain free. Liberals, in order to maintain a nation-state of diverse tribes, need to push a narrative of “diversity” and “equality” in order to maintain the broadest tax base possible. Liberal governments cannot afford tribes splintering off from the collective. Tribes falling for such narratives are the poorest inhabitants of a nation-state and without sufficient capital as a buffer, they are reliant on the false promises of diversity laws and equality policies.

Diversity and equality are poor substitutes for capital and when the marginalized rely on diversity and equality laws that were written by the people with capital, further failure is guaranteed.

Policy that addresses the differences in tribal or ethnic group values and provides infrastructure where different groups can exchange value without given up their uniqueness is the appropriate approach. A true republic would do just that where self-sustaining groups choosing to go their own way would be left alone to thrive without being subject to onerous rules created by people who do not even look like them.

#BlackHistoryMonth: Shit Jesse Jackson, Roland Martin, or Tom Joyner won’t tell you for the next 28 days

In 1619, Africans were brought here as capital inputs for an agricultural industry in a British colony. Over the next 400 years the status of that human capital would be transformed through a civil war fought to transition a country into a nation-state; an economic reconstruction period where said agricultural society would become an industrial society; a civil rights period where the industrial society would begin its transition into an information society.

During this period, descendants of African slaves brought to America would inherit and practice the politics of appeasement and inclusiveness hoping that a narrative of diversity would serve as a preamble for full incorporation into a society that never valued them for anything more than physical labor and entertainment.

As we approach the 400th anniversary of their enslavement in what is now known as the United States, descendants of African slaves brought to America have to ask themselves how and why their narrative of appeasement, inclusiveness, diversity, and social justice was co-opted by every other ethnic or sub-culture group and how these groups have been able to leap ahead of blacks in terms of employment and capital ownership.
America and the globe is entering the Fourth Industrial Revolution. When will blacks, those descendants of African slaves brought to America, begin their first real revolution?

MLK Day 2018 and Europeans still wouldn’t trade places with you

Ask the average European or a modern day descendant of Europeans if they would trade places with a person of African descent, the answer would be no. At that point the person of African descent would have a decision to make. I can continue with the kumbaya of appeasement or I can use today’s technology and the loopholes in law to vacate, to go my own way, to be sovereign.
 
Mr Trump’s alleged comments (alleged because none of you were in the room and the people who said he said it did a poor job of standing up to him, hence cannot be trusted) should signal to people of African descent that it is time to give up the “We shall overcome” mantra when the oligarchs are signaling in no uncertain terms that “You can’t overcome when you were never issued a warm welcome.”
 
And if global support against Mr Trump’s alleged comments is what people of African descent in America are hoping will swoop in and save them like Jesus, those hopes are best put aside because, and probably due to a persistent disconnect with global affairs, the globe really does not look at us with any high favor either.
 
One would think that on a day that blacks celebrate the birth of a man that preached about freedom, that freedom from a failed narrative that has served to only imprison blacks in a continuous cycle of delusion regarding justice would be their goal.
 
As usual, I expect too much ….
 

Social media: Scourge of and escapism for Black America

Last week after ten years I gave Facebook the heave-ho. A friend from college sent me the invite to join back in 2007. I recall saying to him, “Kevin. Aren’t we too old for this bulletin board shit?” He responded that it appeared to be a great platform for keeping up with his kids. I said to myself that using it to keep in touch with my nieces seemed like a good idea. So I joined.

During that ten year period I connected online with interesting new people, high school and law school classmates. I have been fortunate to reconnect with family members and meet cousins on both sides of the family. In some ways it strengthened the ties within the lineages and helped drive home the importance of the tribe.

On the flip side, Facebook exposed a neurosis festering in Americans, and in particular Black Americans. Americans are divisive and lack critical thinking skills. By fueling the neurosis, Facebook, and I believe unintentionally, has contributed to the hyper-partisanship that the United States is experiencing. Facebook has made it very easy to allow its users to create near impenetrable silos thus discouraging worthwhile, thought expanding conversation and replacing it with ad hominem and vitriolic language, behavior that a civilized democracy is allegedly not supposed to reflect.

In short, Facebook has exposed an inconvenient truth; that civility is not the rule, but increasingly the exception to social interaction. It is not surprising that the Russian government was able to create fake pages and spread static loud enough to discombobulate the average voter. Facebook provides enough digital real estate for every Farmer Brown to build a silo of ignorance.

I used the word static as opposed to information. There is a reason. Facebook has built a business model on the ability of grab the attention of subscribers by encouraging them to exchange mostly valueless noise. The vast majority of static on Facebook cannot answer the question of “so what?” I believe that when you bombard the human brain consistently with meaningless noise, you erode a person’s critical thinking skills. And that is a scenario that Black Americans cannot afford.

Black American’s disproportionate use of social media is disconcerting because it feeds the narrative that Black Americans are not strategic thinkers and make political decisions based on their emotions. Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram are emotional cesspools, perfect places for those brave enough to opine on politics from an emotional, lack of depth perception. Making assertions based on static obtained from a cable news program is intellectually obscene given the political agendas of the cable programs on-air personalities.

Take for example the debate on net neutrality. The majority of comments on Facebook leading up to the 15 December 2017 vote were made by a vast majority of Facebook subscribers who had not read the net neutrality rules slated for repeal, had not read the section of the Communications Act upon which the rules were based, and were consistently conflating net neutrality principles with net neutrality rules. The two are different.

But when ignorance in social media post can go viral via a hashtag, the tide becomes unstoppable.

One can argue that I am being a bit uptight and prudish. Surely I should not expect every political media consumer to go out and read every bloody statute, regulatory code, etc., before making a decision. My answer is, yes, I do. Today’s political economy environment is where you extract the resources necessary for your physical, emotional, and mental survival. You are required to know it, just like your ancestors were required to understand the currents on the seas that they fished, and the terrain upon which the hunted and grew food.

Given African America’s lack of access to capital and the political abusive relationship it has with political parties, observing. extracting, analyzing, and distributing value-driven information upon which important decisions can be made is more important than digesting static filled content that passes through you as quickly as white rice, stripped of nutrients that keep you strong.