Minister Farrakhan Reminds Black Detroit to Stick Together

[FrodosPet]

http://blacklikemoi.com/2013/05/minister-farrakhan-reminds-black-detroit-to-stick-together/

Speaking to about 250 religious and community leaders here Thursday, minister Louis Farrakhan urged unity among African Americans and called on them to buy up property in Detroit.

“We don’t have a lot of money,” Farrakhan said of African Americans. “But we have about 500,000 to 600,000 blacks” still in Detroit.

~ snip ~

Speaking at New Destiny Christian Fellowship Church in Detroit, Farrakhan urged Christian pastors to stay true to the teachings of the Bible and not compromise on such issues as gay marriage. He quoted frequently from the Bible and the teachings of Jesus as he told the crowd that Detroit can rebuild itself only if its people are grounded in good morals.

~ snip ~

Farrakhan is in Detroit this week for the first time since 2007, when he addressed 50,000 at Ford Field. Since the Nation of Islam was started in Detroit, Farrakhan said he feels an obligation to help the city. He is to speak Friday before the Detroit City Council and at Fellowship Chapel, the Detroit church led by the head of the Detroit Branch of the NAACP.


~ snip ~

------------------------------------------

Many people want to believe minister Farrakhan is an outlier, that he has no significant following in the African American community. I apologize for the burst bubbles folks: he DOES. Perhaps not a majority, perhaps not the people you know, but even amongst non-NOI members, people of color DO listen to him.

The challenge is how to refute him in a way that does not make enemies - that does not make progressives look like arrogant know-it-alls who are just trying to tell black folks what to do and what to think.

[FrodosPet]

1. John Conyers apologizes for Louis Farrakhan's anti-Semitic remarks

http://www.freep.com/article/20130523/NEWS01/305230119/John-Conyers-apologizes-for-Farrakhan-s-anti-Semitic-remarks

~ snip ~

“Farrakhan made unacceptable racist, anti-Semitic and homophobic statements, which I condemn in the strongest possible terms,” Conyers said. “It was my expectation that Minister Farrakhan’s speech would focus on the many challenges facing the city of Detroit. In previous days, he had discussed efforts to revitalize our city by purchasing property and investing in blighted neighborhoods. Regrettably, he used this opportunity to promote views that have no place in civilized discourse.”

~ snip ~

---------------------------------------

Politicians. Ughhh. Even the best of them are all about CYA. Go to the meeting because Farrakhan is a popular figure in Detroit. Then, when the fire gets hot enough, play the "I had no idea he would say stuff like that" card.

Rep Conyers is NOT a naive kid who was blindsided by his beliefs.

[NOLALady]

2. He's wrong about gay marriage.

But, what is the problem with a message of self-reliance and family values?

[Number23]

14. + a million. He's also wrong on his anti-Semitism

but his decades long pleas for black self-reliance is on point, as far as I'm concerned.

[alp227]

118. This guy is wrong and even kooky on a whole buncha issues.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Louis_Farrakhan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Farrakhan#Criticism_and_controversy

Especially his levee hole conspiracy theory about Hurricane Katrina. There are a whole buncha other people who have similar self reliance messages and not the crazy talk of Farrakhan, like Jesse Jackson and Boyce Watkins.

[craigmatic]

3. I'm black I like Farrakhan and what the NOI is supposed to stand for because more black people

should own businesses in their communities and build.Every other ethnicity that comes here does it (little Italy, little Havana, etc). I fail to see any problem with anything cited here except the gay marriage thing.

[FrodosPet]

4. Group denounces Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments in Detroit church

http://www.freep.com/article/20130522/NEWS01/305220133/Anti-Defamation-League-slams-Louis-Farrakhan-remarks

The leading Jewish civil rights group in the U.S. slammed anti-Semitic comments made in a Detroit church by Minister Louis Farrakhan, the head of the Nation of Islam. The Anti-Defamation League is also calling upon Detroit leaders who invited Farrakhan and hosted his talks last week in Detroit to condemn his remarks.

At Fellowship Chapel in Detroit, Farrakhan railed Friday night against what he called “Satanic Jews” and the “Synagogue of Satan,” which he said controlled major institutions in the U.S. He also alleged that President Barack Obama “surrounded himself with Satan ... members of the Jewish community.”

Attending Farrakhan’s speech were the pastor of the church, Rev. Wendell Anthony, who heads the Detroit Branch NAACP; U.S. Rep. John Conyers, a Democrat from Detroit; Detroit City Councilwoman JoAnn Watson, and other religious and political leaders.

~ snip ~

[cali]

20. The NOI is a hate group. Here is what the SPLC has to say

And if you fail to see that he's an anti-semitic bigot, well, that puts you in his company.


Louis Farrakhan heads the Nation of Islam, a group he has led since 1977 and that is based on a somewhat bizarre and fundamentally anti-white theology. Farrakhan is an anti-Semite who routinely accuses Jews of manipulating the U.S. government and controlling the levers of world power. Farrakhan blames Jews for the slave trade, plantation slavery, Jim Crow, sharecropping and general black oppression. Farrakhan's tone grew more belligerent in June 2010, when he sent letters to several leaders of the Jewish community as well as the Southern Poverty Law Center demanding that they realize the evils they have perpetrated and that they work to further Farrakhan's goals. The letter ended with a threat to "ruin and destroy your power and influence here and throughout the world" if his terms were not met.

<snip>

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/louis-farrakhan#.UZ8th9isp7l

[craigmatic]

63. I don't agree with what he says about jews.

But I do agree with what he says about what black people need to do domestically.

[cali]

67. I'd like to say fair enough, but it's not. that's like someone saying

I like David Duke. I agree with him on economic policy but not on what he says about minorities.

People like Duke and Farrakhan are bigoted pigs and what the say about economics or this that and the other thing is completely marginalized by their bigoted speech.

they should be shunned and condemned by everyone who is not a bigot.

[craigmatic]

70. Look man historically most of the presidents were racists even FDR, Truman,LBJ, Lincoln, etc.

If I as a black liberal can say that they did good things what's wrong with me saying the same thing about Farrakhan? Furthermore you have to understand most black people don't even know any jewish people well enough to have a real opinion one way or the other so when he says this kind of stuff nobody really pays him any attention because blacks weren't historically oppressed by jews. Also to classify the NOI in the same league as the KKK is ridiculous to me. One is a religious group that brought Islam to black people and opened business in the community and preached self-respect and dignity while the other has a long history of killing and lynching blacks for standing up for their rights. How many jews has the NOI lynched? How many synopgogues have they burned? I can't think of any. I'll reierate I do not subscriobe to any of his opinions on jews but at the same time I don't think jewish people are in any real danger from the NOI. These aren't neonazis we're talking about here. Neonazis will get militant and murder people but the NOI stops at rhetoric that falls on deaf ears by most who listen.

[XemaSab]

115. Being a racist in 1860 and being a racist in 2013 are totally different

In 1860 the idea that disease was caused by germs was still controversial. Evolution was a brand-new idea. The first oil well had been drilled the previous year. The pony express started that year.

Things like radio, the light bulb, the transatlantic telegraph, and the automobile were still years away.

In summary, people were fucking ignorant, just like anyone else who still espouses racism.

[cali]

133. So the past is always and only, prologue?

Anachronistic comparisons are hardly a way to prove any point you may be trying to make.

now, point by point: so what if most black people don't know jews? Do you actually believe that not knowing members of an ethnic or racial or religious group keeps people from being prejudiced. That's flat out false and a ridiculous excuse. And sorry, all you have to do is google to find out people do take him seriously on this. As for NOI being in the same league as the KKK? Not historically, but certainly currently. NOI hasn't lynched any Jews- and the KKK hasn't lynched anyone over the past few decades either.

Danger isn't just about organized violence. It's also about spreading poison and hate that individuals buy into and then commit violence against those that have been targeted by words like the vile Farrakhan.

Anyone who in any way, form or shape defends bigotry is part of the problem.

That is you.

[NOLALady]

128. Sure. I agree.

There's no difference between the Farrakhan's NOI and Dukes KKK.

The NOI is an organization of hate speech. The KKK is an organization of lynchings, church bombings, intimidation and murder. They are so obviously the same.

And anyone who thinks different is obviously a bigot.

[Number23]

132. LOL. I am dying. How much nerve do you have to have to feel you need to explain to a black person

what the KKK is? I mean, I am DYING. The superior attitude, the "we know what's right and better" bullshit is simply astounding.

And the fact that the person arguing with a black person about what the KKK is and is about is as wrong as two left shoes is just the icing on the shitty little cake.

[cali]

135. tell it to the SPLC

[Number23]

141. No one at the SPLC would be stupid enough to equate the NOI with the KKK

They have designated the NOI as a hate group based purely on its rhetoric whereas the KKK has a hundred years of murder, bombings, intimidation and oppression under its belt.

I have nothing but immense respect for the SPLC. Some of the posters around here? Not so much.

[cali]

134. that is true historically about the KKK It hasn't been true for decades

Currently, the type of hate rhetoric employed by the KKK and NOI are strikingly similar.

Who to believe? YOU? or the SPLC and my own observances?

That's easy.

[NOLALady]

143. You should believe anything that suits you.

I believe my own observances and experiences.

If that makes me a bigot, so be it.

[KamaAina]

73. Isn't there anyone else who's calling for more self-reliance in the black community?

Lkie maybe someone who isn't a homophobic, anti-Semitic, racist bigot?

[craigmatic]

78. The homophobia comment I get, the anti-semitism too but how is he racist?

[KamaAina]

79. He speaks of the melanin-challenged as "white devils"

Hence, racist.

[craigmatic]

82. Look I'm just going to be honest here if you're trying to make me disavow him you're wasting your

time. I'm not Obama and he's not Rev Wright. Also why is it that black people are the only ones that have to disavow somebody just because they don't totally agree with everything they say? You don't have a relative that's a little racist but may have treated you well? Would you be so quick to disavow them?

[KamaAina]

85. Yes, I do. And I do call him out on it.

Actually, Republican Stepdad isn't that big of a racist, for a repuke, but he is pretty homophobic, and I don't tolerate that from him.

I was actually suggesting that you could find another leader who espouses the cause of black self-reliance without bringing the bigoted baggage that Farrakhan does.

[craigmatic]

90. My whole point is that since when do outsiders get to tell a group who their leadership should be?

That is imperialist thinking. Nobody is perfect- you aren't and I'm not. This guy is from a different era and I don't agree with everything he says but that's never stopped me from admiring white guys like Harry Truman who said nigger alot or FDR who looked the other way while lyinching happened in the south or Bill Clinton who once referred to black people as "you people" back in 1992. This is just going to have to be one of those things we agree to disagree on.

[KamaAina]

91. John Conyers called Farrakhan out on his bigotry, too.

He's hardly an "outsider".

[craigmatic]

98. No but he's a politician who doesn't wanna rock the boat. How old is he like 70-something?

He's just looking at the next election.

[geek tragedy]

100. Or maybe he objects to anti-Jewish and anti-LGBT

bigotry, regardless of who spews it.

[craigmatic]

101. We could both be right you know.

[onpatrol98]

109. Ain't that something?

"My whole point is that since when do outsiders get to tell a group who their leadership should be?"

Yeah, that's interesting isn't it.

[Number23]

113. Nice to see you again, onpatrol!

This thread is exhibit #4902 for why there are about a dozen black posters here. I vehemently disagree with and am disgusted by so much of Farrakhan's message but you know what I dislike almost as much? People who ain't black trying to tell me who the fuck I should be listening to/supporting as a black person.

As a matter of fact, I wouldn't be surprised if alot of black people in this country support that man just to piss off the good "liberals" who think they know how to be black better than we do.

[onpatrol98]

124. I know, right.

It's hard not to resent being spoken to like a prepubescent stepchild who has started hanging around with undesirable friends from the other side of town. Especially when you could probably find other threads where they don't seem to give a flying flip who their real kids interact with, what they do when they get together, or what happens to their bodies.

But, woe be unto you if you disagree with a preapproved script that you darn well didn't and won't get a chance to participate in creating.

I don't know a single black person in my life who doesn't think Farrakhan is racist. But, it's almost like these people don't think we will have the mental capacity to understand water is still wet even if a racist says it. You can almost get a mental image of someone standing in front of you waving their hands back and forth, yelling "Don't listen, don't listen." and then "You're in big trouble, mister. Just wait til I get you home."

That's where all this stupid disavowing comes from. I disavow this person. I disavow that person. Like it erases what you've just done???

Tell the truth. I don't agree with everything the man says. I believe some of it is downright evil. But, as for what the black community needs to do economically speaking, the brother has a point. And, the last time I looked around, I was grown and can go anywhere and talk to anyone I darn well, please.

These people only have the power over your lives that you give them. And that goes for Farrakhan, David Duke, the KKK, Republicans, and heretofore any democrat who decides they get to think for other capable grown folk of any ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religious affiliation without their permission.

[Number23]

127. Exactly. What I see is a thread in which every black person posting in it has said

"I disagree with/don't like when Farrakhan says xyz. I am in complete disagreement with him on xyz issue but I agree with him on the issue of black self-reliance, independence etc." and we are being spoken to as though we are children by some of the most clueless people here.

The point that black people are FULLY capable of thinking for ourselves appears to fly right over their heads. If anyone is being closed-minded and ignorant, it ain't us.

As I've said, I think Farrakhan hurts his causes far more than he helps them. Which is one of the reasons his status has diminished so much. But this is an issue for US to deal with. And like you said, I still resent like hell that someone who is not a member of my community feels in any way ENTITLED (and yes, that is the perfect word) to tell me who I should be listening to and supporting.

Someone even mentioned that Boyce Watkins is a more "suitable" person to listen to than Farrakhan. If I cared enough, I'd probably ask why I should listen to such a paranoid asshole as Boyce Watkins, but then that would look as though I cared. Watkins has said a bunch of stuff, particularly about this president, that has given me the willies. But he's also said some things I agree with. But then again, that's me being an intelligent person capable of thinking for myself. Which as a person with melanin, I guess I'm not supposed to be allowed to do here.

[cali]

138. I am not going to tell anyone who to listen to, but I will call out racist pieces shit

like Farrakhan and I damned well will say that if you are silent you are fucking complicit.

[Number23]

142. Then I will add that it's a very good thing that your opinion, on this issue and ANY OTHER

means less than nothing. You sound just like those stupid assed Republicans who demand that ALL one billion Muslims condemn the acts of terror done by a few. You sound EXACTLY like them.

I don't see any black posters as being "silent" in this thread. Every last one of us has said in no uncertain terms that we don't agree with Farrakhan's anti-Semitism and anti-gay stance, or that is certainly what I've said over and over again. If you need us to start a thread condemning him to Hell for all of the hateful, ignorant, bigoted things he's done, then you just hold your breath and we'll get right on that.

So you accuse others of being "silent" when in reality, the people in this thread who MOST need to actually be silent keep coming in here and posting the stupidest, most inane shit. Irony at its greatest.

[NOLALady]

129. Thank You.

There's nothing I can add to your wonderful statement!

[Number23]

130. Sorry for the salty language, NOLALady. But this is exactly the kind of thing that makes me want

to scream. And then kick somebody's ass.

The idea that anyone who is not black would feel in any way entitled to tell a community of 30+million people who have endured and who are STILL enduring things they have only read about who and what they should support makes me sick to my stomach. This place reminds me more and more each day why so many black people have almost as negative an impression of liberals as they do of conservatives.

As this thread exhibits, we are fully capable of thinking for ourselves. The ignorant, paternalistic asses trying to tell us that NOI is the same as the KKK and who is more "suitable" for us to listen to? Not so much.

[dsc]

136. Imagine for a moment that the gay rights movement in this country

had a leader who said the same stuff about blacks as Farrakhan says about gays. Wouldn't you tell gays they had to disavow him and find non racist leaders? If so, then why can't we ask you to do the same? If not, why on earth not?

[cali]

137. so no one should call out Israelis on their choice of leadership? Happens every day here in I/P

We should never ever call out right wing xian ministers either. and on and on.

fucking insane.

and we certainly shouldn't call out a whole host of white supremacy and separatist groups that don't have any history of violence, right?

[XemaSab]

116. I hate those black devils stinking up our cities

And Muslims are Satanic and the president is surrounded by Satanic influences.

I'm not racist, I'm just telling it like it is.

[cali]

131. first of all black people sure as shit aren't the only ones that have to disavow someone if they're

bigoted. Not by a long shot. And this isn't about "not agreeing with someone". It's about someone who is a vile bigot. And are you related to Louis Farrakhan? No? so it's not anything like that uncle you have to put up with at Thanksgiving.

You don't want to disavow him? Fine. You have made yourself a party to his bigotry. that is not to say you are bigoted, but those who tolerate it, are party to it.

[geek tragedy]

74. So you admire him for the same reason he admires Hitler

Here the Jews don't like Farrakhan and so they call me 'Hitler'. Well that's a good name. Hitler was a very great man. He wasn't great for me as a Black man but he was a great German and he rose Germany up from the ashes of her defeat by the united force of all of Europe and America after the First World War. Yet Hitler took Germany from the ashes and rose her up and made her the greatest fighting machine of the twentieth century, brothers and sisters, and even though Europe and America had deciphered the code that Hitler was using to speak to his chiefs of staff, they still had trouble defeating Hitler even after knowing his plans in advance. Now I'm not proud of Hitler's evil toward Jewish people, but that's a matter of record. He rose Germany up from nothing. Well, in a sense you could say there is a similarity in that we are rising our people up from nothing, but don't compare me with your wicked killers.

[craigmatic]

80. Show me exactly where you got that from with a date and location of where the comments were made.

Just posting random quotes isn't enough.

[geek tragedy]

81. Okay . . .

http://www.finalcall.com/perspectives/rift.html

[craigmatic]

84. Ok now that I see the context of it I get what he was saying.

The whole incident seems like whoever was behind the Jews against Jackson were the original swift boaters and their goal was to provoke Farrakhan and Jackson into a heated exchange and hurt the candidacy. When the right did that to Kerry it wasn't funny and to me this is not really funny either.

[geek tragedy]

86. Your comparison is worthy of Mel Gibson. Kerry was a hero. Farrakhan is a bigot.

Jackson did use a bigoted slur.

Those are all facts.

There was no "Jewish conspiracy" against Jackson. Jackson did call them "hymies" and did refer to New York as "hymietown"--and Jackson begged for forgiveness.

This is not about Jackson, whom I believe was sincere in recanting those shitty comments.

Anyone who defends themselves against charges of anti-semitism by praising Hitler is not only an anti-Semite, but a lunatic.

[craigmatic]

88. Ok so we're just going to completely ignore what led to all that happening?

The Jews against Jackson thing probably had something to do with him supporting the Palestinians' right to land or something in Israel right? My whole take on this story is that Farrakhan probably took the whole incident more personally than Jackson did and he probably did hold a grudge but look at how he was saying "our Jewish brothers" before this and what he said after. They clearly looked for something to piss them off to get a response and unfortunately they were successful. Just goes to show the power of image and language. Funny how this kind of thing never seems to hurt republicans.

[geek tragedy]

92. The wider backlash against Jackson was due to his bigoted remarks

and ham-handed attempts to deny and spin it at first.

They clearly looked for something to piss them off to get a response and unfortunately they were successful

Your attempts to blame Jews for objecting to slurs hurled at them is pretty disgusting, I must say, and echoes in what Farrakhan and Gibson have said--that reaction to their anti-Semitism is a Jewish conspiracy

[craigmatic]

96. Just let the record show that you said Jewish conspiracy not me.

All I said was that somebody clealy didn't want Jackson to win they could've been Jews or more likely conservatives trying to throw a wrench into the works and that Jackson and Farrakhan took the bait. The result was that Farrakhan took it more personally than Jackson did because he was just speaking and not running for anything.

[geek tragedy]

99. Just to be clear:

In your view, the victims are the people who uttered anti-Semitic slurs, and the bad guys are the people who objected and denounced those anti-Semitic slurs.

Most of us think anti-Semitism is a bad thing and objecting to anti-Semitism is a good thing.


Sorry you disagree.

[craigmatic]

102. Don't strawman me, sir.

To me the bad guys are the ones who set this all into motion in the first place saying things like Jackson is bad for Israel then Jackson will ruin America. Whoever put out that ad was intent on stirring shit up.

[geek tragedy]

104. Sir, I understand what you say perfectly.

Jackson made ugly bigoted comments. Farrakhan has made a living bashing Jews as well as LGBT Americans.

You have steadily refused to fault them for that behavior and have dismissed the very real and legitimate anger and backlash against them as some nefarious conspiracy.

No. Jackson and Farrakhan got perceived as anti-Semites because they acted and talked like anti-Semites.

If their anti-semitic comments bother you in the slightest, you have not communicated it at all.

[craigmatic]

105. Look at my other posts in this thread if you wanna know how I feel about his

comments about Jews.

[cali]

140. nope. you said it. You didn't use the word conspiracy but you sure as shit said it.

I understand now why you admire that bigot.

[cali]

139. wowzer. you've come right out of your closet. It was the Jews fault.

disgusting.

[malaise]

5. Farrakhan is a fascinating character

He speaks in the Caribbean every year about issues relevant to people of African origin everywhere. It's always standing room only. I sure don't agree with everything he says butI'll listen to him.

[cali]

8. well, that sick shit. he's a bigoted piece of shit. and listening to him and excusing him puts

those folks in the same camps as surely as the cretins who go to hear Pamela Geller and say "oh I don't agree with everything she says but I'll listen" or those who go to hear David Duke and say the same thing.

[Bluenorthwest]

9. Enjoy your hate rally.

He's a racist, a homophobe and and hater of Jews. So why would you listen to him? How is that shit relevant to anyone of any origin? Hitler had a paced house, you know.

[Bluenorthwest]

6. He's a hate monger, a hate preacher, a worthless purveyor of ignoance and misinformation

When he attacks LGBT people, he is attacking first and foremost African American people. Don't forget that. The people who suffer most from what he profits from greatly are black people.
He is no different from Fred Phelps. Refute him as you would any racist homophobic slime.

[cali]

7. shocking. people not supporting bigotry

people who excuse or accept his anti-semitic bigotry are tainting themselves as bigots.

[HiPointDem]

10. you mean you don't think blacks should stick together or band together to buy property in

detroit?

you mean you think blacks should just cede to ethnic cleansing and the removal of their civil rights under detroit's 'emergency manager' law?

why would anyone want to refute him? he's correct.

If people want black people to stop paying attention to farrakhan they should relieve the problems that bring people to farrakhan.

[FrodosPet]

11. I've supported African Americans buying property and starting businesses for years

It may be a hit to my popularity here at DU, but I have long believed black folks need to take control of their communities and their lives, because TPTB don't seem to be willing to help them. In that regard, I have supported what Mr Farrakhan has said for a number of years.

But the following turns my stomach:

----------------------------------

At Fellowship Chapel in Detroit, Farrakhan railed Friday night against what he called “Satanic Jews” and the “Synagogue of Satan,” which he said controlled major institutions in the U.S. He also alleged that President Barack Obama “surrounded himself with Satan ... members of the Jewish community.”

----------------------------------

Doesn't that message deserve to be denounced?

[HiPointDem]

12. sure. but denouncing it does little good when the issues that bring people to farrakhan are not

being addressed. and they're not. they're getting worse, in fact.

why are so many people open to that message?

well, low-income to middle-class blacks were targeted in the mortgage debacle; middle-income blacks have been effectively targeted in education deform-driven school closings, firings, charter conversions and also in state & local government cut-backs; and also in attacks on unionization, like the auto bailout.

because blacks are more likely than whites to be unionized, more likely than whites to be government workers, and because black teachers and staff have been disproportionately laid off or fired under education deform policies -- and all of this hits the black middle class.

not to mention 'emergency management' of schools and government in detroit, and in michigan overall, such that 2/3 of black people in michigan have been stripped of their civil rights.

not to mention neighborhoods being subject to policies of 'planned shrinkage' (city services like streetlights and responsive policing/fire being removed, etc.), such that entire neighborhoods are designated as sacrifice zones and property rendered valueless.

when people are under attack, it does not one bit of good to tell them their beliefs are wrong. if you want their beliefs to change, change the terrain.

[FrodosPet]

13. By any chance, do you live in Michigan?

I agree about the disenfranchisement - that is pure bullshit. If the people want to elect crooks and incompetents like Kwame Kilpatrick and Monica Conyers, that is their right.

As for the shrinking city: I've worked as a cab driver and a door-to-door meat salesman in the city of Detroit (which I suppose makes my guts bigger than my brain considering those are two of the most dangerous jobs in the world in one of the most dangerous cities in the world). There are neighborhoods where the vacant, often burned houses and vacant lots which used to have houses, outnumber the livable. I applaud anyone who has the skills and resources to rehabilitate them, and appreciate that part of the minister's message. But one has to ask - who has to suffer in other parts of the city to provide full city services to a deserted area?

[HiPointDem]

16. I doubt anyone has to suffer, were revenues assessed & distributed equitably. By which I mean:

if it were not the case that ghettoization followed by ethnic cleansing followed by gentrification were not planned, deliberate elite policy.

I know that sounds nuts, and I'm not going to try to convince you. I'm just going to say that it's based on a lot of study of historical & geographic precedents and a bit of personal experience.

No, I don't live in Michigan. I live on the west coast in a small resource extraction-based town currently under assault by the same forces that turned detroit and other large cities into ghettos.

[FrodosPet]

17. If people had a pocket full of money, they would not be criminals?

So rich people should never be criminals. But I hope we both know that is not true.

Many years ago, Detroit's "white flight" turned into "black flight". People in the city are scared of crime, because many people are victims of crime. In certain areas, you have a 1 in 7 chance of being a victim of violence. People don't want to remain there.

Also, Detroit is an old city. Old buildings which take a lot of resources to keep maintained. If the people who live there keep stealing or destroying building materials, how will anything ever get fixed?

You mentioned streetlights. You need wires to keep streetlights lit. But people steal the copper right out of the streetlights (and anywhere else they can find it).

I'm just having some trouble with understanding your definition of equitable. It seems you are advocating that if criminals are sufficiently paid to sit home and watch TV, or given jobs they don't have to show up to, they will lose their desire to "get tore up" (drunk and/or high), or to rob someone, or to teach the fools slinging on their turf a lesson. If I am wrong in that assessment, I apologize. I would like some more clarification and fresh ideas, because I really do love this totally f*cked city and want to see its people doing better than they are doing now.

Ultimately, though... there is blame by the boatload to go around about what is wrong with Detroit. Yes, it needs revenue. And it needs that revenue to be wisely spent, not just thrown around blindly.

It also needs the people who are living in Detroit to step up. To buy the stores and houses and put some drywall and paint and sweat and elbow grease into them. And it needs a cultural change, that people are willing to call the police on the predators. In other words, stop the "Stop Snitchin" attitude.

[HiPointDem]

18. it's not about a pocketful of money. it's about a more equal society. and yeah, more equality

translates to less crime, of all kinds.

no worries on people in detroit stepping up. the bigshots are already buying up real estate right & left, and have been for some time, even as they were promoting the picture of detroit as a wasteland of vandals and junkies.

it makes prime real estate a lot cheaper. and detroit for various reasons is prime real estate.

within 10 years you won't recognize the place: mark my words.

i'm not going to waste any time trying to convince you; i'm just going to tell you that it's very easy for big capital to turn any city or town into a detroit, with all its attendant ills. they can do it quite deliberately, and do. it doesn't matter what kind of people live there, what color, religion, ethnicity they are -- everywhere is potentially detroit.

similarly, the same people can turn detroit into -- well, modern-day new york. which was once sort of like detroit, or at least vast swathes of it were.

and they're in the process.

you think some people just *are* criminals; they have some essential identity as 'criminals'. and other people are *not* criminals; they also have that essential identity.

therefore, the problems of detroit are about low-level criminals who have 'ruined' the city. it's just bullshit. but i understand you can't see it that way.

[FrodosPet]

24. I guess me just is too dumb to understand big smart talk?

Are you going to spend any time trying to convince others? Are you looking for allies or arguments?

I admit I am not a super genius, but I am a man with a reasonable amount of literacy and imagination. And I do care about Detroit and its citizens. If I am so hopeless in my potential to convince about what you are saying, well, I hate to tell you, but you are going to have a tough time educating others who largely are not quite as motivated as I am to see this mess fixed.

As far as the criminals thing goes: By definition, if you commit a crime, whether it is because of desperation, or laziness, or just being a sociopath, then you are a criminal. It does not matter why you committed it. So yes, there are a lot of criminals in Detroit.

[HiPointDem]

26. It's nothing to do with intelligence. If I gave you that impression, it wasn't my intention.

Last edited Fri May 24, 2013, 09:23 AM - Edit history (1)

I said I'm not going to try to convince you because it's not something you'll be convinced of by argument, evidence, education.

E.g. If I ask a random assortment of people in the street whether or not the US is a democracy, I'll get an assortment of answers, and the differences will be more about their different experiences rather than their different intelligences or knowledge bases.

"Yes" is the default, because we're indoctrinated early on with the idea, in school, from media, via public rituals (4th of july, elections). We're inculcated with emotional attachment to the idea, it gets intertwined with our very identity -- but we don't generally think much about it very consciously, or deeply -- unless we have an experience that makes us question what we've previously taken for granted, like a fish doesn't think about the sea until it's poisoned so to speak.

Dozens of unconscious concepts like that are involved in how people think about a situation like Detroit and how it came to be that way. There's a master explanation handed to us by 'the powers that be,' but the reason it rings true (to those for whom it does) is because of underlying beliefs, values, concepts, and not so much because of some deep study of a broad database of 'facts,' or because of any greater or lesser intelligence.

My ideas about detroit are based on experiences which contradicted the standard narrative. I also like study and research, which helps, but without the experiential challenge and interest in the question i could have read the same research and come to different conclusions.

I believe economic and political elites build up or tear down regions economically in a planned, strategic way, in pursuit of their own interests, and irregardless of the interests of the residents or the general population. They do so by investment and disinvestment, as well as other associated means. They have the economic power to do so, so they do it, just as in say latin america elites will shoot peasants and take their land -- because they can, because it serves them.

According to the mainstream narrative that's a crazy idea. If you're deep into the mainstream narrative you'll think so too, and you will not be able to hear, or you will discount as unrepresentative, anything I offer as evidence.

If you're questioning mainstream narratives because something in your own experience has made you uneasy, then you'll think about it and see if anything rings true to you. If it does, you'll look for more information.

But drawing that conclusion leads to different conclusions about how to help fix Detroit.


and as for criminals: i think we all understand intellectually that someone like Bush -- who lied us into war, causing the death of hundreds of thousands of people, the destruction of institutions, families, communities, and the destabilization of the middle east -- is a bigger 'criminal' than say some jean valjean stealing bread to feed himself, or even someone like jodi arias, who killed one person.

in fact, i think we all would agree that jean valjean is no criminal at all, that when the state conspires to starve people by withholding resources from them that people aren't 'criminals' just because they won't lay down and die on command.

but we (& by 'we' i mean basically middle class americans) don't somehow feel it with the same emotional depth. bush is enjoying his life unmolested while millions of people are salivating over the jodi arias coverage and would gladly pull the switch to fry her. why?

(not that arias is any jean valjean figure, just that the depth of hatred some people feel for her is so out of proportion to the damage she did in comparison to someone like bush...)

[XemaSab]

117. So in the 1930s in Germany

you would say that Chamberlain should have worked on addressing the German people's problems first and foremost? And that it's really his fault that Hitler came to power?

Interesting....

[HiPointDem]

119. noi is in no way analogous to the 1930s-era nazis. but interesting you'd claim it was.

[XemaSab]

120. At one point the Nazis were just a group of jerks holding meetings in bars

If you have one Nazi in the US, that's one Nazi too many, no matter the color.

[HiPointDem]

121. I have to spell it out for you? NOI is a black organization. Black people are a historically

persecuted minority in the US, and that history of persecution is an integral part of NOI's schtick.

If the Nazi Party had been run by Jews who were focused on persecuting Roma, there would be some analogy.

But it wasn't.

NOI has about as much chance of occupying a position of power analogous to the Nazi Party's as I have of becoming president. That is, none.

The minute they become an actual material threat to anyone that matters is the minute they are gone.

Not to put too fine a point on it, NOI is an organization that collaborates with elements of the US power structure, maintains the color line and a separatist ethos (anti-white as well as anti-semitic), and channels semi-radicalized black people into politically neutralized outlets.

NOI has been around since 1930. Its anti-semitism is just enough to sound kinda rad to the disaffected looking for a scapegoat, but I've yet to hear of any roving bands of NOI adherents attacking jews on the street, burning jewish businesses, or the like. I doubt it's ever happened.
Just mouth.

More politically salient is NOI's ties to people like Khaddafi. I think from the cheap seats it's impossible to know what that means except that it's part of the world of intelligence and counter-intelligence (for example, Libyan funding to NOI was channeled through BCCI).

An interesting development is NOI's recent alliance with Scientology.

Here's the speech under discussion. I've listened to it about half-way through (fell asleep mid-way so need to do the second part). In the first hour two remarks that can be called anti-semitic. One is at about 15' -- the jews rejected jesus/hollywood as purveyor of destructive trash) and another at about 43' (someone is supoenaing (NOI?) something -- they're a tool of the satanic jews).

In between, Farrakhan spouts such mainstream (& basically conservative) messages as don't eat at mcdonalds (bad for you); you have to create your own job, take care care of your kids, don't make excuses, and similar stuff. He speaks as a 'christian' here from the stance that he's both a christian and muslim.

http://www.noi.org/webcast/weekly-archive.shtml

[XemaSab]

122. So because you're a persecuted minority

you're allowed to be racist in turn?

Interesting.

[HiPointDem]

123. you like straw men? interesting. no, because NOI is a group based on the position of black

people as a persecuted minority within a majority white european state, it's not analogous to the nazi party in germany, whose position was that of a white german/christian ethnicity majority within the german state.

duh.

[Behind the Aegis]

15. He is a homophobic, anti-Semitic bigot supremacist.

Last edited Fri May 24, 2013, 05:04 AM - Edit history (1)

While he make salient points, it doesn't negate he is a vicious bigot who goes to great lengths to deny it as do his supporters. If David Duke was pro-gun restrictions/pro-background checks/basically everything the left-of-center finds acceptable, should his speech be posted here? Would a Democratic politician be given a "pass" if attended a speech (and let's say the speech didn't even have spews of anti-Semitism and racism) where he was a featured speaker?

He is a bigot, but even bigots can sometimes correctly assert the sun will rise in the east and set in the west.

[pink-o]

40. + 1,000,000!

There are many other voices who espouse the lifting of African Americans, speaking out against the racism and corporate corruption that affects their communities far more than ours. And those folks are NOT hating on another, historically oppressed minority to get their point across.

This is typical divide and conquer, an attitude that keeps the disparate groups of oppressed people from banding together and becoming a strong force against the power base. We can't be tribal in the 21st century. Especially Jews and African Americans...we've had so many of the same experiences. We fought side by side for Civil Rights in the 60s. And whoever wants to hate on a few rich Jews in banking and the media, remember this: most of us are working stiffs like the rest of you! I'm sure the church-going African Americans, who live in caring communities don't appreciate the stereotypical gangsta and gun-toting pimp/drug dealer they get slammed with. Well, we're not all greedy, money-kissers either!

[leftynyc]

19. Seeing people support this

hate mongering asshole literally makes me nauseous. They should be ashamed of themselves.

[cali]

21. they should be kicked off of DU just as anyone who supported David Duke would be kicked offf

[leftynyc]

22. But they wont be kicked off

And we both know why....it just makes me shake my head.

[cali]

23. I don't know why

I don't think Skinner tolerates any form of bigotry here.

[leftynyc]

25. OK - I'll say it

Islam gets a pass around here like no other religion - religion is crapped on on a regular basis on DU but you can't say anything about Islam without the inevitable "look over there" nonsense. If a representative of any other religion had said anything close to the garbage that louie spouts on a regular basis, they would be crucified on DU (rightfully so) but apparently louie hates the "right people" so he'll also get a pass. It's very much part of a pattern.

[HiPointDem]

27. religion is crapped on here regularly, but islam in no way gets a pass. this thread is mostly

crapping on farrakhan, so i'm not sure why you're saying he's getting a pass.

a few posters are saying things that don't completely crap on him, but they don't have much to do with islam and they're not endorsements of anti-semitism, homophobia, or the rest of that suitcase.

[cali]

28. do you grasp why Farrakhan should be roundly condemned on a site like DU?

Anyone who defends Farrakhan in any way whatsoever is no better than anyone defending Pamela Geller or David Duke. NOI and Farrakhan are, respectively, a hate organization and a hate leader. Period. There is no redemption from that.

Ever.

Hate is hate. No excuse for racism and bigotry. If you excuse it, you are a bigot.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/profiles/louis-farrakhan#.UZ9LNdisp7k

And yes, there are a disturbing number of posters here defending and excusing a hatefilled bigot. That makes them no better.

[HiPointDem]

30. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2893646


I think most thinking people understand that what is considered 'hate' and what is not is often defined by the balance of power, and who holds it.

[cali]

32. yes, people are drawn to shit when they're desperate.

that doesn't mean one excuses or condones it. There is still an obligation to speak out.

Something you are reluctant to do.

[HiPointDem]

34. actually, i'm not the reluctant type, cali.

[cali]

36. you play cutesy.

not an admirable trait.

[HiPointDem]

39. i don't want or need your admiration, cali.

[cali]

29. that's both true and not true. yes, there are people here who give Islam a pass they don't

grant to other religions. And there are people here who do the opposite and consistently and crudely exhibit bias.

But you are right that the crap Farrakhan spews would be condemned by 100% of the people here if it was about Muslims.

[HiPointDem]

31. no, it wouldn't be condemned by 100% of the people if it were about muslims. condemnation

would follow the same lines of bias you outlined.

i've never seen anyone here give islam a pass they wouldn't give to other religions. i've seen anti-religious people who put islam in the same pot with all religions. i've seen religion neutral or religion positive people who put islam in the same pot and defend it from that perspective. i've seen people claim that islam is a particularly noxious religion compared to others. i've seen muslims defend their religion from attacks, and i've seen people attack islam.

i've not yet seen anyone say islamic practices and beliefs should be especially privileged or are more worthy than others.

[cali]

33. If I wrote that some Christian leader said Muslims are satanic

If I said about Muslims what Farrakhan has said about Jews, in an OP here, I guarantee it would be outright condemned, rightfully, by everybody on DU. Everyone.

There would be none of the excuses and defenses we've seen for Farrakhan.

[HiPointDem]

38. maybe if *you* said it. but what if some comparable public figure said it -- like obama, or the

head of the Jewish defense league.

i think there'd be some differences of opinion.

king and malcolm X are dead and farrakhan survives because farrakhan is useful to the powers that be.

[cali]

45. no there would not be.

and stupid ridiculous speculation doesn't make it any more likely .

I've seen the JDL condemned here by everyone, even the most pro-Israel folks, in the I/P forum.

[HiPointDem]

46. oh, i think we would. but we'll wait for a real life example, though perhaps 'satanic' is

terminology used mainly by religious types.

for the record, no one on this thread gave him a pass for that comment.

1 person said he like farrakhan because he supported black self-help.

another said farrakhan spoke in the carribean about issues of interest to black people and while she didn't agree with everything he said, she would listen to him.

i agreed he is a bigot and demagogue but recommended people think about why his rhetoric appeals to some people and that calling him names didn't do anything to change that dynamic. i also said that farrakhan survives, highly visible, because he's useful to the powers that be. kind of like how african dictators survive.

not to put too fine a point on it, NOI has been around a long time, & saying much the same thing for most of that time. the only time it changed that message somewhat was when malcolm X came to prominence -- but *he* was the one who got killed.

that's a suspicious fact, to me.

[leftynyc]

35. Everybody has their own personal biases

That's part of being human. But only one religion CONSISTENTLY gets a pass around here. I've seen you fight against it yourself.

P.S. As for the other person who responded to my post - I obviously couldn't care less what you have to say as I have you on full ignore so you're wasting your time.

[cali]

37. well, we agree to disagree. As I said, I think Islam gets both undue opprobrium

and gets a pass. I've fought against both here.

[leftynyc]

42. I may not always agree with you

but I do appreciate your righteous attempts at fairness. Hope you have a great holiday weekend.

[cali]

43. thank you and same to you.

[HiPointDem]

47. i'm devastated to hear that. but i'll continue to comment on posts that interest me nevertheless.

[Iggo]

41. "Racist homophobe says to eat right and exercise."

Well gosh, I know he's a racist homophobe and all, and i may not agree with everything he says, but he sure was right about the eating right and exercising part.

[HiPointDem]

44. farrakhan provides some people with an explanation of why their world is the way it is, something

that nutritional advice generally doesn't.

denouncing farrakhan for his racism is pretty weak gruel to people who feel themselves much more the objects of racism.

[Pelican]

48. It is his defining characteristic...

He is a racist and a bigot. Everything that comes after that is tainted and secondary...

[HiPointDem]

49. it's immaterial to my point.

[Pelican]

50. Which is what?

He removes himself from any legitimate conversation the moment he spews his bigoted bile. That's his fault and his choice.

That's the way civilized society works. Bigots and racists are not tolerated. They don't get to play...

David Duke may have some sound investment strategies and a great recipe for pecan pie but no one cares because he is a racist fuck, just like Farrakhan.

[HiPointDem]

51. NOI has been saying the same things since it was founded. But it's still around, & highly visible.

So apparently it does 'get to play'.

NOI is useful to the PTB.

Because no one wants to do anything about the things that make organizations like NOI attractive.

[cali]

52. oh bullshit. I doubt that the ptb gives a flying fuck about NOI

[HiPointDem]

53. whatever you say, cali.

because we know the government/elite is uninterested in muslims, radicals, black people, large political formations of black people and the like.

i mean, history makes that much clear, if it makes anything at all clear.

[onpatrol98]

110. the government/elite is uninterested in Muslims, radicals, black people, etc.

Now, that's the truth.

+1

[Pelican]

54. So what?

The KKK must be attractive to somebody as well. They've been saying things for quite a while as well.

I hear they have great barbecues on the weekend. Hell, they used to be quite the political powerhouse as well.

Doesn't make them right or moral or erase the fact that anything they do is tainted.

It does mean that they should be shouted down and shunned.

[HiPointDem]

57. yes, they are. as are the organizations they've mutated into.

[Democracyinkind]

55. For the record

I do care about why people (and what people) are attracted to the David Dukes of this world. Trying to understand that is something entirely else than justifying it. Not all explanations are justifications - there'd be no science if it were so.

I think Hipoint is making an interesting point that can be easily misunderstood and then construed as support for Farrakhan, which it is not.

Farrakhan offers a narrative that is more in line with their actual experiences than the structural explanations they have been otherwise fed with.

I find that statement absolutely uncontroversial. Also, it does not in the least diminish his bigotry. One can agree with the above statement and still condemn him as a bigot. Which is what I have tried to achieve with this point.

[Pelican]

56. It's a losing battle...

.. and it should be.

Bigots shouldn't get a seat at the table.

That's the sad part I suppose. There are probably some good points in there but they are absolutely lost because of the defining characteristics of NoI and Farrakhan.

[HiPointDem]

60. what is the table you're talking about? the whole point of the louis farrakhans of the world

is to keep marginalized people divided from other marginalized people.

that's very useful.

[Democracyinkind]

62. Who here advocates his being at the table?

I mean, surely we all agree that he has every right to speak his mind - even if only such garbage comes out when he does.

Maybe you're trying to say that an op like this, in which his speech is (almost - note the caveat at the end) treated like a legitimate political event, should not be posted. Then I get your point, but would want to ad that I have seen no one - with the exception of world salad man, who plays by his own rules - support Farrakhan in any way.

[HiPointDem]

59. that's exactly what i meant, & i don't think it was unclear. there are certain posters that have

an interest in misunderstanding, though.

[Harmony Blue]

58. I agree with you

HitPointDem.

Most people rely on real world examples and experiences to try to understand their world. So, that is truly the appeal and this is found all over the world and why shady organizations are supported by a population as they meet their real world needs.

[HiPointDem]

61. thanks for the support. it's a sensitive subject.

[craigmatic]

64. Thank you

[cali]

65. why do you excuse Farrahkhan's bigotry and hate?

I genuinely would like to know.

[craigmatic]

71. Let me ask you a personal question.

Are you Jewish? If so do you agree with every policy Israel has?

[cali]

89. no. and I suggest you check out the I/P column for my posts

about the occupation. I condemn it unequivocally and often get into some pretty heated discussions with people who support Israeli policy.

Though even if I were Jewish, so the fuck what?

[craigmatic]

93. If you were people would try to get you to do what you're trying to get me to do here.

Which is to apologize for something I've said I don't agree with just because I happen to like one part of what this guy stands for and not the whole package. It wouldn't be fair for somebody to try to push you to to go one step beyond saying you disagree with Israeli policy to saying you completely dislike Isreal. I'm not saying he's a messiah I'm just saying he's right about domestic self-reliance in the black community that's all.

[cali]

95. by your reasoning, David Duke is fine and dandy because some of what he says

isn't bigoted shit.

There are lots of black leaders who talk about domestic black self-reliance without being vile bigoted pigs. You are supporting a bigoted piece of human filth. Yes, filth. Just as bad as David Duke or Pamela Geller.

[craigmatic]

97. Well you're entitled to your opinion and I am too.

[onpatrol98]

111. Obama flew to D.C. to attend Farrakhan's Million Man March

+1 Craig

I could be wrong. But, I think I remember reading somewhere that the President flew to D.C. to attend Farrakhan's Million Man March. Now, none of us believe that the President believes as Farrakhan believed about white people or Jews. But, I'm pretty sure he believes in building stronger communities from the inside out.

I believe the President can listen to a person, discard notions that he disagrees with, and use to his advantage the things he does agree with. I have no doubt that the rest of us, even left to our own limited intellectual ability can do the same as the President.

We are quite capable of discarding what we disagree with and using what we do agree with it. End of story.

I doubt seriously any of us are looking to book Farrakhan for our next engagement.

However, honestly...for the sake of dialogue as equals, it probably isn't going to be received well when non minority democrats attempt to chastise minority democrats into a "right way" of thinking.

Every group on DU brings their own baggage into every discussion. I think its more important to understand why a certain group happens to believe or feel the way that they do instead of attempting to bring in a verbal stick and smacking a fellow poster into either obedience or shame.

To tweak Craigmatic's quote: "Well you're entitled to your opinion and we are too."

Not to mention, it sounds like most of us are agreeing more than we disagree.
---------------------------------

[Separation]

66. I dont have a dog in this fight one way or another,

but, his type of speech reminds me of another charismatic speaker. Similiar situations, poverty, hopelessness, unemployment, and along comes a guy and he says, "hey we need to take care of ourselves." (not in itself a bad message) But then goes on to rail against the Jews, and homosexuals.

[geek tragedy]

76. Farrakhan compared himself to Hitler,calling Hitler

"a great man"

[Separation]

103. Wow, that is pretty unbelievable.

I don't know to much about the man, mostly stuff I heard secondhand, that he can say some pretty outlandish things.

But reading the OP gave me goosebumps. I Googled the Hitler thing, and sure enough, he said that. Any time people are beaten down physically, economically, mentally, and socially, there is a real danger with men like this guy. Like I said before, his message of, 'lets pick ourselves up, buy the real estate, build the stores, get it done'. That's a great message, but a soon as you start looking for a scapegoat for your woes...man especially the whole Jewish thing...that's just scary.

As I said before, I don't know much about the man, didn't realize he was a keynote speaker and organizer of the Million Man March, and people were doing the same thing then, the whole, "I dont agree with everything he says BS". I guess he also got a bunch of deserved criticism from feminists as they were not invited to the march. I would hope that he could not get mainstream enough to become dangerous, but people are still standing beside him as he spouts this racist crap and then after the fact apologize or just plain ignore it.

[The Link]

68. Farrakhan is a piece of shit.

I question the intelligence of anyone that finds sincere redeeming qualities in him.

[Prism]

69. Next week, lets talk about all the good things Westboro does!

Sure, they're one of the most poisonous entities in America, but they can't be all bad!

Lord. DU sometimes.

[KamaAina]

72. Did he say anything about the civil rights of Detroiters being trashed?

With this emergency manager BS? Or did he just trash Jews like usual?

[HiPointDem]

77. Louis Farrakhan blasts emergency management, calls on blacks to buy up Detroit property

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2013/05/louis_farrakhan_blasts_emergen.html


I'm still looking for a transcript a/o webcast of the speech to see exactly what he did say & in what context.

The reporting on it is all over the board.

[geek tragedy]

75. Fuck Farrakhan. That he has admirers in the black community

proves only that some black folks are every bit as willing to accept bigotry in their community as any other ethnic, racial, or religious group.

[onpatrol98]

83. A few thoughts...

One of the reasons I liked Malcolm X is that he was able to change his perspective on whites and racism. And, he was vocal about that decision.

http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/471/

Although, Malcolm X was a Muslim...as a Christian, I still liked him. I liked his conviction. I'm not a fan of Farrakhan, though. Not because of what some group says about him. I don't follow anyone else's lists. My own personal opinion is that he is a racist. He's not the same as the KKK. That minimizes what the KKK did. But, he's racist all the same. I don't believe everyone who listens to him is racist. People compartmentalize.

The same people who believe torture is bad, can believe that killing with drones is okay. People who go to church every Saturday, Sunday, and maybe even Wednesday night, won't blink an eye as a political party fights to remove God from their political platform. There are people who believe in same sex marriage who don't believe in interracial marriage.

We will give people a pass if we agree "enough" on the issues that matter the most to us. I haven't found a person yet that doesn't compartmentalize. Not on DU or anywhere else. What matters the most to you, often depends on the seat you're sitting in.

Now, I'm sure there are people who exist who don't compartmentalize. I just don't know any of these individuals. If you have supported just about ANY living politician, you've mastered the art of compartmentalization.

[kwassa]

106. I think many here don't understand Farrakan's historic appeal in parts of the black community.

Much of his message involves conservative messages about being self-supporting, self-reliant, creating businesses by and for black people. The NOI was doing this as their message early in the civil rights movement and owns this message, in a way, for the past 60 years or so. This appeals to black urbanites, particularly those feeling alienated from general society. Farrakhan's brief moment of stardom was the Million Man March, which struck the right message of responsibility and self-reliance at the right moment in history. Overall, though, he does not have great appeal in black America.

Farrakhan is also as wacky as the day is long, and those who like his self-reliance message can also compartmentalize out both his anti-Semitism and the racist science-fiction belief system that has little to do with traditional Islam. Farrakhan is really, really into numerology.

[onpatrol98]

108. Good Point...

You know, that's an excellent point. Because I imagine really many of us would say we grew up with that part of his message...about being self-supporting, self reliant, creating businesses within our communities, AND not relying on individuals outside of our communities who don't necessarily have our best interest at heart.

So, THAT part of his message has mass appeal. But, he does not. You're right.

I had NO IDEA he was into numerology. I never would have guessed that.

[ecstatic]

87. Here's the problem. The OP has a provocative headline that contains 2 topics

Some people will only see the Farrakhan part of the headline, and others will focus mainly on the "Reminds Black Detroit to Stick Together" part. And then when you read the OP, you discover there's actually 3 topics! This is causing some posters to accuse good DUers of defending a whole list of things that they don't defend. Too many things were jammed into one thread. Better to address one topic at a time.

How do I feel about Farrakhan? Ambivalent, leaning more towards negative. He's very well known, but besides being able to recognize the celebrity aspect, I don't really know anything about him other than he's muslim and is involved in various community organizing efforts. One time I saw him on TV and I was turned off by offensive comments he made about women. I've heard that he's anti-Semitic.

How do I feel about his Detroit comment? Sounds good in theory, but unrealistic based on history. At some point, Detroit will be rebuilt. The question is--how long from now and can regular people afford to buy now and wait for it to come back. Based on what I've seen, the investor class always wins in a situation like this because they have immediate access to tips about government contracts and funding. When that time comes, they'll offer the people who have been struggling to manage their empty investment properties a small check and send them on their way in time for the gentrification process.

What's my response to his gay marriage rant? I think Farrakhan's comments about gay marriage were rude and insensitive. I'm sure there were gay people in attendance who were surprised to hear that he felt that way. He may have even pushed someone further into the closet or closer to suicide, which is reprehensible. The key to change on this issue will be for more people to be brave enough to come out, and Farrakhan's speech obviously didn't help with that.

Series11! How can I convince "the blacks" not to listen to Farrakhan?!!11 Did you mean not listen about Detroit, gay marriage, or both? Don't worry, Farrakhan does not have the influence that you think he does with respect to shaping opinion. He, like most celebs, will be quoted and talked about when he makes a provocative or controversial comment that creates or continues a debate. NBC's Grio did a survey: "25 Most Influential Black American Leaders of All Time" and Farrakhan is not on the list (despite his name being among the choices for people to vote on). Again, Farrakhan is well known, so quotes on certain topics probably will receive air time and debate, but that doesn't mean that people are blindly following him like sheep.

[Number23]

112. And some see the mindless railing and it reminds us of why there are about 10 black posters here

I think his comments on gay marriage and Jewish people were much, much worse than "rude and insensitive." I completely disagree with his comments and his beliefs on these topics as have the other black posters in this thread.

But comparing the NOI to the KKK is just about the stupidest, most ignorant thing I've seen here.

I think Farrakhan has actually hurt his cause more than he's helped and I agree completely that his profile has diminished significantly over the last 20 years or so. But there are still alot of black people that will listen to him because of his well-known work in and love for the black community. When some of the people in this thread do the same, then perhaps they'll get the same audience.

So even though I disagree with the man far, far more than I agree with him, the idea that some clueless fuckwit with no clue about my community feels in any way entitled to tell me who I should listen to or support makes my skin crawl and has me truly seeing red. I may need to trash this thread.

[Deep13]

94. That guy is no Jesse Jackson and he sure as hell is no MLK. nt

[kwassa]

107. I think you are wrong about Farrakhan's influence; he is an outlier.

The best thing you can do with Farrakhan is ignore him. He is quite old, has been in poor health, and when he dies the NOI will die with him.

He is about 80 now.

He was never able to put together a political movement that had a major impact in any election in this country.

http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/politics/1180/the_nation_of_islam_at_the_end_of_the_apocalyptic_age

“(Farrakhan) is an eclectic and electric leader,” said Walters. “Electric because probably he could be the only person who could assemble that kind of crowd...

“Eclectic because he could make profound change in the black community, but the trajectory wasn’t followed through,” Walters added. “The Million Man March could’ve influenced public policy—there was so much momentum, especially right after the (1996 presidential) inauguration. But not another word was said about it. That gave many of us pause.”

“They didn’t follow through on the Million Man March strategy for what to do, and alliances to build,” Magida said. “It revealed the shortcomings of the Nation and Farrakhan’s philosophy.”

In the months following the March, 1.5 million black men registered to vote—an upsurge attributed to its influence. As well, community-based projects were initiated in the March’s wake, including parenting classes and workshops on gender relations. Local members of the Nation ran for elected offices and after they didn’t win, Walters said, they didn’t persist. Walters added that three years after the March, many community projects had fallen away, but their impact was still apparent. Ten years after the March, its concrete legacy was “negligible.” The Million More March in 2005 was not as large as the one before it and was largely commemorative.

[Number23]

114. "The best thing you can do with Farrakhan is ignore him." Agree 100%, kwassa

His profile has diminished significantly over the last 20 years. And I think a large part of that is because he is so behind the times on issues like gay marriage and his blatant anti-Semitism has probably turned alot of black people off.

I think his profile is only as high as it is today in the black community because of the residual power from his hey-day in the 1980s and before. And I think even that will be gone before too long.

Nelson Mandela, he ain't.

[onpatrol98]

125. True...

And, if black people weren't witnessing their communities in a perpetual depression regardless of which party is in power, also.

That's the only thing I can see that would explain why he could be perceived as having any sense of legitimacy. Because to a community that just can't seem to get any results no matter the circumstances, voices like his seem to offer a solution.

But, these days, I think you have to look within, and around you for solutions. It's not coming from Washington, Farrakhan, the NAACP or the democratic party. But, it can come when we get together with our neighbors within our own communities and make a difference. It's really the only time when our agenda matters.

Our communities were already experiencing a depression and no one cared. It wasn't until it spread to other communities that people realized it was a problem. But, guess what. Somehow, the recovery will miss us too, unless we take care of ourselves and others.

[onpatrol98]

126. It's good to see you, too.

I try so hard just to lurk...but sometimes...