The First Time My Facebook Page "Blew Up"

There is a phrase within certain communities in America. It is a phrase that is in reference to one person or an group of people calling one's cell phone many times, often in rapid succession and usually over a short span of time. The phrase speaks of these people "blowing up your phone." This can occur when its your anniversary and you're suppose to be meeting your honey for dinner and you're running about 20 to 30 minutes or more late and your integrity is beginning to be questioned by that person. It can occur coincidentally when a number of friends randomly decide they want to connect with you. It can occur when bill collectors get bugs up their azzes in that very special way bill collectors tend to get bugs up their azzes. The scenarios are endless. And there are also endless emotional responses we can have. Annoyance is common. So is frustration. Sometimes having our phone blown up inspires a type of affection and warmth that comes with realizing we are loved and cherished enough by at least somebody that they are worrying the hell out of us to make that love known to us through the medium of cell phone technology. I have discovered that a facebook page can also get blown up.

In January of 2009 I had recently created a facebook account. Two months earlier in November of 2008, I had been laid off from my job as a manager at a large AIDS Service Organization non-profit in San Francisco, CA. I was living in a nice, friendly co-housing community in the Fruitvale district of Oakland, California; a district known for its high Latino/Latina population and culture but also known for having significant numbers of other people of color residents as well, of which I was one as an African Descended man.

I had opened the facebook account at that particular time for a very specific reason. Even though I had recently been laid off and was now facing large and looming uncertainty about my financial future, I had planned a trip to Europe several months before the lay off and had decided that, despite the lay off, I was going to go through with my European travel plans. Setting up the facebook account was part of my plan for keeping in touch with friends on this part of the international dateline as well as other parts of the world while I traveled. I realized facebook would be a great way to give friends around the world up to the minute updates on whatever adventures and misadventures I would experience in the coming weeks.

I left San Francisco International Airport on December 26, 2008 on a non-stop flight to London's Heathrow Airport. I was going to visit at least three countries. I bought a festive and colorful "Happy New Year" sign with each letter of that phrase individually cut out. I draped it across my window for my roommate and friend Skye to see on New Years Day. I wanted him to know I was thinking about him even though I would be thousands of miles away by the time the actual day arrived.

I arrived in London, met a friend for lunch, and within several hours was on a speeding train to Lille, France to meet another friend Gerard, whose home I would be staying at, in nearby Belgium, for the first leg of my journey. We had a wonderful four days. And then my facebook page blew up.

Early on New Years Day, back stateside and in my Fruitvale neighborhood, at the nearby Fruitvale BART Station, a young African Descended man named Oscar Grant had apparently been shot by a BART police officer. Details were very sketchy at first. But suddenly my newly acquired facebook account was overflowing with angry, shocked and in some cases, totally disbelieving posts from dozens and dozens of my friends in Oakland and from around other parts of the San Francisco Bay Area. The first post came from my friend Clay Smith who lived next door and who usually was up in the wee hours of the morning. He was probably one of the first people in the whole city to be on the computer letting people know what was happening. Soon it became very clear that this was a murder that many people were quickly seeing as being unprovoked and another example of Oakland's long and shameful history of excessive police force aimed at young men of color.

From many of these facebook posts I got the clear impression that something very big and something potentially very scary was going down in my beloved Oakland. I don't remember what time of the day it was in Belgium when the first influx of facebook messages and posts about his event came in. I am almost certain in was very early in the a.m. on January 2nd, Belgium time. I had Gerard turn on one of the twenty four hour French news channels on the TV. And sure enough, within minutes was the international report and there were the familiar images of the Fruitvale BART station on the screen and the familiar insignia of the Oakland Police Department on black and white police cruisers on the screen as well. I had frequented that BART station almost every day for more than a year. And this was the same station I had used to start my journey to Europe. I had taken the BART to SFO just a few days earlier. Now this station was on French TV. There was chaos and confusion all palpable in the video images. This BART station seemed nothing like the calm, tranquil BART station I had taken into San Francisco just five days earlier. It had now been transformed into an ugly crime scene. And from what I was hearing from my friends in Oakland, it was also the scene of a New Years Day execution. It was one of the most surreal moments I have had in recent memory. I sat before the TV motionless, in some form of shock. Tears started rolling down my cheeks, uncontrollably. I couldn't believe what I was hearing and seeing.

When the shock wore off a few minutes later, the only feeling I was able to clearly identify was a strong desire to return to Oakland. I seriously considered it. I eventually decided to stay in Europe for the duration of my planned journey. But from that day on, it was a very different journey. My trip had not been ruined. That had not occurred. It was just different now.

I returned about three weeks later. I flew back to San Francisco from London. I took the BART train back to the Fruitvale station. I got off the train, walked a few feet and just stood there on the platform for a very, very long time. I don't know how long I stood there. It was long enough for people to start staring at me. That takes some doing in Oakland. I got my wits about me and walked the three to five blocks back to the house I shared with my friend Skye. I walked into my room. There, draped across the window, was the sign I had placed there just before I had left. "Happy New Year."

THE BEST OF MOYO AFLAME 2011: 20/20s "Shots in the Classroom" Continues the Networks Biased/Wolf in Sheep's Clothing Reporting Style With Regard to LGBT Related News Stories

This piece first appeared on Moyo Aflame on October 9, 2011


I now have enough evidence to firmly support my belief that something very shady is going on over at ABC/ABC News when it comes to how the network and in particular its various news programs, report on LGBT themed stories. Last month I reported on Primetime Nightline's biased program devoted to transgender teens. And now the network has done the exact same thing with this past Friday's report of the recent Brandon McInerney murder trial.

If you are unfamiliar with the case, here are the highlights (or lowlights, whatever the case may be). In 2008, in Southern California, a 14 y.o. Brandon McInerney (who is white) shot and killed his 15 y.o. classmate, Larry King (who is part black). He killed him execution style by shooting him in the back of the head at close range--twice. The murder occurred in their classroom. The presumed motive was Larry King's gayness and because he reportedly flirted with McInerney on numerous occasions culminating, by the report of many, with Larry asking Brandon to be his valentine. A few days after the "valentine" episode, Brandon brought a .22 caliber gun to school and murdered Larry.

Now, like almost any murder case these days, there are all kinds of twists and turns and side stories and allegations that come into the mix in some way or another. If you want those, just do a google search using either of the boys names and you'll get hits to your hearts content. The twist and turn that most interests me  and many members of the LGBT communities, particularly members of the African American LGBT communities is that Brandon's defense team settled on one of several defense strategies that is generally an anathema to members of the LGBT communities and that is the dreaded "gay panic" defense. Again, for those not in the know, the gay panic defense essentially asserts that a heterosexual person being hit on or flirted with by an LGBT person is such an incredibly and absolutely horrifying experience that it literally justifies homicide as a reasonable response.

My overarching problem with the entire broadcast right out of the gate:
A few weeks before this broadcast, the County Prosecutor's office who is prosecuting the case announced they are going to re-try the case (the first trial ended in a hung jury). Once again, they are going for a murder one conviction. The show was aware of this development and admitted to such at the very beginning of the program. Here is my problem with this and its a big one. Doesn't broadcasting this program anytime before that re-trial takes place run the big risk of tainting the jury pool? I believe the obvious answer is yes. For some reason however, ABC seems more than willing to take that risk in order to produce a propaganda piece for Brandon McInerney, his family and his defenders. I don't know what 20/20s ratings are. Whatever they are, its still a program that's seen across the globe and that includes southern California. I'm not employed in the criminal justice system but this seems to me to be a problem. And as we'll see, since the program takes a decidedlypro McInerney stance, the program is going to potentially--no make that will almost certainly be a problem for the prosecution. The defense, on the other hand, with this program in tow, just got a type of free advertising and sympathy that all the money in the world could not have bought them. Unbelievable!

Who the program spoke with:
I watched the program twice. First, I watched it simply as a viewer. The second time I watched it with the eyes of a same gender loving man of African Descent who was working as a consultant for the prosecution. In this role I paid special attention to who the program chose to interview (and not interview). Before watching it the second time I took out a piece of paper and made three columns. Those columns were labeled, "interviewee for the defense," "interviewee for the prosecution" and "neutral interviewee." There is only one person who may be seen as fuzzy when it comes to this breakdown. I'll deal with her in a minute. I would defy anyone including anyone currently working as a defense attorney or as a prosecuting attorney to disagree with me after watching the program. Here is the breakdown: The program interviewed sixteen people (including the controversial one) who can without question, in my opinion, be viewed as interviewees squarely in the corner of the defense. The show interviewed one person who can without question be viewed as an interviewee squarely in the corner of the prosecution. This is a teen aged girl who is reported as having been Larry King's best friend. She comes across authentically as such. The show interviewed one person who can be viewed as neutral. Additionally, that sixteen includes both the mother and the brother of Brandon McInerney and the 20/20 reporter (Juju Chang) comes back to them multiple times. In all fairness, she comes back to the lone defender of Larry King multiple times as well. But its not the same. I'll get to that in the next section.

The neutral person is a reporter who covered the case from the very beginning. Fair enough. Good choice.He basically just reports the facts more or less. The controversial person is a former teacher (she now works at Starbucks and we are not told why this career change was made) of the two boys and who was a witness for the prosecution during the first trial. Now however, not only does she rejoice in the fact that the first trial resulted in a hung jury, she also criticizes the prosecutions decision to re-try the case. Even Juju Chang questions/opines out loud during the program, "would she still be considered a witness for the prosecution?" Indeed. Good question. The answer---I think not!

The only agonizingly prolonged shot in the entire program:
The only lingering shot in the entire program comes near the end of the program (That's important. More impact, better remembered). And it is a shot of Brandon McInerney's mother as she is crying after being asked how she deals with the thought of her son being transferred from juvie hall to the adult prison. I timed the shot. It lasted approximately 10 seconds. And this is what ABC calls impartial reporting?

Odds and Ends:
1.   Six of the seven jurors who wanted Brandon to receive the lesser conviction (manslaughter) were interviewed (replete with "Save Brandon" wrist bands on their arms that at one point were proudly shown to the camera). None of the five jurors who wanted him found guilty of murder one were interviewed and no explanation was given for that choice.

2.   None of Larry King's family members were interviewed and no explanation was given.

3.   Other information that is damning to the defense was included on 20/20s further exploration of the case on the shows website but was not included in the broadcast. Who goes to a website to get more info? I'll tell you who, people like me who were shocked by the broadcast (and likely already in the corner of Larry King), not people who believed they got all they needed from it.

4.   The main prosecutor in the case refused to be interviewed on camera and I understand that decision given the case is going to be re-tried.

5.  In  2004 when interviewing the two men who murdered Matthew Shepard, the reporter, Elizabeth Vargas, presented their initial and almost universally viewed as completely unproven defense that the murder was the result of a drug deal gone wrong rather than the hate crime framing that it truly was. This essentially gave the two killers a huge platform in which to do nothing but drag a murdered gay mans name through the mud on national television for no reason other than ratings. So ABC has been doing this for years.

Go here if you wish to view the entire broadcast online. Here's my previous piece on Primetime Nightline's September story on transgender teen-agers.

THE BEST OF MOYO AFLAME 2011: Let Me See If I Am Able to List Here All the Elements That Coalesced in the Troy Davis Nightmare

This piece first appeared on Moyo Aflame on September 24, 2011

1.   Racism/White Privilege: The entire criminal justice system in its core construction in America is racist even though specific individuals and perhaps some specific offices or elements may not be. Still, they are all operating under the umbrella of a very clearly racist system. Racism and White Privilege/White Supremacy are always in tandem in America.

2.   Classism: Wealthy Americans typically don't get executed in America. That is by design not by coincidence.

3.   The Conan the Barbarian Syndrome/The Entire Inhumane and Barbaric Capital Punishment Industry in America: Self explanatory.
4.   The Prison Industrial Complex in America: Self explanatory
5.   The Controversial and often Misinterpreted/Misunderstood Religious Concept of "An Eye for An Eye" as Applied in American Jurist Prudence, Social and Pop Cultural settings: Go here for further elucidation.

6.   The Bloodthirsty and Revenge Elements of American Culture: The ones that are distinct from those found in #s 1,3,4 and 5.

7.   "Up The Ladder to the Roof"/The Proscecutorial Food Chain Syndrome: A city or state prosecutor's ability to climb up the proscecutorial job promotion food chain is directly equal to his/her ability to simultaneously and with equal vigor, climb down the human compassion one.

8.   Georgia on my Mind: It has been proven that the more lynchings a U.S, state engaged in during the time period when such were common, the more likely such a state is to have a high number of executions, particularly of men of African descent. Georgia has a very significant lynching history.

9.   White Cop/Black Defendant: This is a subset of yet still distinct enough from #1 to merit its own category.

10. The Current and Scandalous SCOTUS (Supreme Court of The United States): Self explanatory.
11. Politics As Usual: President Obama, among others, is complicit with this one.
12. Money, Money, Money Moneeey: In America money plays a role in everything.
13. Ronald Reagan: Doesn't everything bad that has happened in America in the last 30 years somehow find its root in the reign of "The Gipper?"

Why The Eradication of Both White Privilege and Racism Have To Be a Part of the Progressive/Liberal Agenda, Part III, Finale

People get tired of racism. People get tired of talking about racism. People get tired of listening to other people talk about racism. It is not only people who are somewhat or largely racist who tire of these discourses. Many people get tired of this topic. I am strongly pushing the bounds of tolerance simply by composing a three part series on this blog about it. Even some of my most loyal fans will likely roll their eyes and shake their heads in disbelief and exasperation when they discover I have written yet another installment on the subject. That's just how averse we are in America to talking about racism.

I have learned that virtually everyone (who is not black or brown) or who is not very seriously engaged in and committed to some form of active anti-racist work, eventually gets tired of talking about racism and wants to move on to another topic of discussion. Racism is not a sustainable conversation with a very large cross section of American citizens. It is very much like we as a people are engaged in a type of stealth like behavior, when it comes to discussions around race. We are lying in wait for any random cataclysmic, newsworthy or even pop confection of a story to break so that we can exhale a huge sigh of relief and completely pounce on this new thing, full force, whatever it is, and give energy to it instead of to the ongoing and always relevant discussion of racism.

The problem of course, is that so many of these new things especially the big ones also have a very clear racialized or race related aspect, energy or undertone to them that is so powerful it often simply cannot be ignored---Hurricane Katrina, the signs present at early and ongoing Tea Party rallies, the rhetoric that emerged from early and ongoing Tea Party rallies, bitherism, the passage of California's proposition 8, the American recession, the passage of Arizona's SB 1070, the passage of Alabama's HB 56, the execution of Troy Davis, etc. America is anything but a post racial society yet so many of us so desperately want it to be. This desire is so deep and so insidious that it has become as ingrained in the American ethos as racism itself.

Its easy to understand why Americans are so eager to move past racism. It is a very ugly yet integral part of our past history and current reality. It is a national embarrassment. And most people don't enjoy being embarrassed. We tend to want to move past embarrassing episodes in our personal lives as quickly as humanly possible. The same is true for our national lives as well. And it is not just African Americans who have been subjected to the American brand of ethnic based bias, of course. This is a country of the occupied, the enslaved and of immigrants. Every single occupied indigenous nation, family with enslaved ancestors and every immigrant group who has found themselves within the borders of the sea to shining sea-ness known as America has experienced some form of horrifying legacy of ethnicity based bias within these borders. There are the Native people's whose land was initially appropriated, The Jews, The Irish, The Italians, The Germans, The Japanese, The Chinese, The Mexicans, The Nicaraguans, The Salvadoreans, etc. One could write a very good and very compelling history of America simply by writing it through the prism of our history of racism and the stain of ethnicity based bias.

Many people also have a very poor level of competency when it comes to discussions around racism. There are voluminous misconceptions. There is a lot of disinformation. People are uneducated or under educated about the subject. People have been told lies that they believe even if covertly so. Some people with media power deliberately repeat these lies. People get very defensive. Some people get crazy. People feel guilty. People feel shamed. Some people experience it as the ultimate "gotcha" conversation. Some are competitive enough to never want to engage in a discourse where they are on the wrong side of that gotcha. People feel buzz killed. I have compassion for all of that. I honestly do. And you know what? Get over it. Because the result of not getting over it, as whomever the genius was in early AIDS activism so solemnly bemoaned, silence = death. It really is as simple as that for me when it comes to my lack of tolerance for people's desire to avoid conversations about race.

There was a video that circulated around the internet a while ago. It was Morgan Freeman talking to Mike Wallace on 60 Minutes about race. Freeman's antidote on the topic was to simply cease and desist when it came to discussions about racism. Morgan Freeman is an imposing and convincing person. Many of my white facebook friends tagged me on their sharing of the video. They praised it endlessly. I was captivated by the video. The teacher of conscious living part of me who understands that one gives power to that which one speaks about, knew exactly what Morgan Freeman was talking about and was drawn in almost completely...but not quite. As more and more of my white friends engaged in deeper and deeper and more enthusiastic praise for Freeman's perspective, I began to notice that none of my black friends were responding to it similarly. And I have many black friends with very strong opinions. Many white Americans desperately want to move past Americas racist history. Black folks response to that is more often along the lines of, "uh, hold on Sally." Morgan Freeman, I believe, is in an interesting minority in his perspective as far as black Americans go. Lets explore deeper.

I went back and watched the Morgan Freeman 60 Minutes interview video again, and again, and again and a few things began to pop out at me. First, there is the undeniable fact that Morgan Freeman has far more class and other forms of privilege than the vast majority of other African Descended men and women in America do. This is important. Its difficult to imagine this having no bearing at all on his philosophy whatsoever. I believe it is largely his privilege speaking when he adopts his colorblind philosophy. Second, in the interview, in defense of his essentially colorblind philosophy, Freeman says to Mike Wallace, "I am going to stop calling you a white man and I'm going to ask you to stop calling me a black man." Seems simple enough, right? For me however, there is one glaring problem with this approach. Here it is:

I very recently watched the video of this exchange again. In the meantime, since recording the original program with Wallace, Morgan Freeman has been featured on one of the installments of Professor Louis Henry "Skip" Gates Jr's PBS genealogy program African American Lives. On this program it is revealed that, like many blacks from the south with the same last name, Freeman's name was taken when his ancestor became free from slavery as a direct nod to that momentous event. Hence, Free Man. So every single time he is referred to as a black man and especially when he is addressed with the inclusion of his last name or whenever his last name appears in print, Freeman's connection to America's slavery/racist past is being conjured up...literally. And he wants to try to forget that? Move past that? Well, sorry, he can't no matter how hard he tries. It is literally a part of him.

The other big problem with Freeman's approach is that colorblindness usually equals some form of active denial or complicity when the issue is America's relationship to its own racial history and contemporary reality. There is no better place to observe this than in liberal progressive white America that often believes colorblindness is a very good thing. It isn't. I do believe in the spiritual understanding that we give power to what we speak about. I have discovered however, that there are clear limitations to the application of this. When it comes to social justice advancements in the recorded history of humankind, such advancements have never, ever been achieved through silence. They've never ever been achieved simply through osmosis. They have been achieved through acknowledgment and then the long, hard work that follows and always with the ongoing acknowledgement just a half step behind whatever the current hard work calls for. Morgan Freeman's solution may be an appropriate one at some point in America's future. It is not a solution for the current American ethos around the issues of race, white supremacy, white privilege and black oppression and genocide.

On-site links:
Why The Eradication of Both White Privilege and Racism Have To Be a Part of the Progressive/Liberal Agenda, Part I

Why The Eradication of Both White Privilege and Racism Have To Be a Part of the Progressive/Liberal Agenda, Part II, OCCUPIED Edition

Why The Eradication of Both White Privilege and Racism Have To Be a Part of the Progressive/Liberal Agenda, Part I

And there's the rub.

In America, at least, in terms of political strategy, we have left wing politics and we have right wing politics. That, of course, is overly simplistic. It however, is not so overly simplistic as to significantly obscure the fundamental reality of current American political structure. There are what are observed by many as extremes on each of those poles, naturally. Yet even these extremes are not so dissimilar from the less extreme nor moderate expressions from which they are a part, to necessitate a completely different rubric being used or proposed.

Race is a completely made up construct, of course. There is no proven biologically based feasibility to the construct whatsoever. Many have attempted to discover such feasibility. Each, to date, has failed miserably. So why is there such cachet, so much gnashing of teeth, such vitriol and so much power attached to this construct if it is completely made up? The answer: The two principal artifacts of the invention of the construct of race are white privilege (or white supremacy to be more accurate) and racism. In stark and revealing contrast to the construct of race itself, these two artifacts are very real indeed. There is not one single person on the entire planet earth who has not been dramatically impacted and affected by both of these artifacts in some way, I don't believe. And every single one of the people with the greatest wealth and power on the planet has benefited enormously from them both. This is true even if they sincerely did not want to benefit from them and even if they are a person of color; which the vast majority clearly are not (see this). These people have simply achieved their accomplishments in spite of white privilege and racism, in such cases. You cannot ever convince me that there are not many blacks who have worked just as hard as Oprah Winfrey has. You just can't (if you take the time to meticulously peruse that list of the 400 richest people in America, you will notice Oprah is the only African American on the list. There are exactly zero African American men on it. That is not a coincidence. That is not an accident. It is by design!)

One thing that also needs to be kept in mind here is that there is no such thing as a truly self made man or woman on the face of the planet either. Every single person who has accomplished whatever has been accomplished in his or her life regardless of discipline or scope or arena has been achieved with the assistance of a virtual army of other largely unseen and unknown people.

The right wing in America, for the most part, makes little pretense about their engagement in cashing in on and exploiting the construct of race. The reigning poster child for this cashing in on and exploitation has to be none other than Herman Cain, Republican candidate for president in these United States of America. I see no irony in the fact that he is African American and has undoubtedly been on the receiving end of racism and that his "successes" have most certainly been curtailed by white privilege as well. Naturally, he seems to be very averse to admitting this, publicly at least. The only thing that is potentially tragic about Herman Cain would be some revelation that he sincerely believes he will get the Republican nomination. It would be very sad indeed if he ever believed such a thing. It would however provide quite a bit of fodder to those in America who deeply believe in the concept of karma. Lest there be any uncertainty, let me clear it up once and for all, Herman Cain is not going to be the Republican nominee for president in 2012 in these United (divided) States of America.

On the left, particularly in the so called progressive left, we have what appears at first glance to be a more complex and complicated situation. Don't be fooled. It is a ruse. True, many who are a part of the ruse may not really consciously know they are part of a ruse. Still, they are part of a ruse nonetheless. There are also people on the left who are actively not a part of the ruse. They are primarily certain breeds of anarchists and revolutionaries. The easiest way to expose those who participate in the ruse, consciously or otherwise, and who are white, is to gather a bunch of white progressive liberals in a room and present a proposition to them. It begins with a question: "How many of you are willing to completely dismantle your white privilege by surrendering and liquidating all of your financial assets, giving up your American way of life and going and living the rest of your lives in Liberia, West Africa?" Followed by the dissemination of the following additional information: "One way tickets have already been purchased for you. All you need to do is go to the back of the room where you will find lawyers and financial consultants who will assist you in the liquidation of all of your assets. When that process is completed, then you just need to come to front of the room and collect your one way plane tickets. Planes will be leaving in exactly two weeks. At that time you will need to do whatever is necessary in your personal lives to allow you to leave at the appointed time. Spouses, significant others and family members are of course welcome to join you. We have made provisions for that. Everything is being underwritten by a personal contribution by George Soros. In Liberia, of course, only people of Black African descent can become citizens and therefore own land. We have arranged with Liberian officials for you to live there indefinitely but without the benefit of citizenship." 

There would be people of African Descent and other people of color in the room whose role would be to simply sit back and see how many people make their way to the back of the room and then to the front. This ladies and gentlemen is an experiment that would likely end up significantly deconstructing the supposed deep differences between the American left wing and the American right wing when it comes to the artifacts of white privilege and racism and the role they play in each groups real lives.

Most white people are not willing to give up their white privilege even if they are very well educated about race theory, white privilege, the tyranny of left wing color blindness and such. I understand that. I get it. At the same time however, it is this reality which all non whites spend our entire lives intimately dealing with every single day. The hypothetical I presented above, is pointing that and a number of other things out. And it all still reflects a real problem for white progressive liberals in America because it is literally the big white elephant in the room for such progressive liberals in this country. Most have not discovered ways to put their money where their mouths are when it comes to being, in a very deep way, allies to people of color while simultaneously confronting their own white privilege and in some cases the addition of what we know as class privilege. I know many white progressive liberals who are smart, active, dedicated to change and with all kinds of other positive attributes who ultimately still get caught up in the white privilege web. All white people benefit from both white privilege and racism including white progressive liberals. At some point this has to be more than simply acknowledged though sincere acknowledgement is a very good starting point.

While doing research for this essay I inadvertently came across a blog by a Russian American young woman who is a self identified progressive liberal living in the USA. She is smart, highly educated, dedicated to social change, compassionate and a social justice activist. I landed on a post where she was discussing a piece by renowned anti-racist writer and lecturer, Tim Wise. The quote I will provide below illustrates very clearly to me and hopefully to you, the problem of the white progressive liberal in America today with regard to white privilege and race.

"I recently read an article by Tim Wise, who according to himself is “among the nation’s most prominent anti-racist educators.” 

The article starts with an assumption: “Whites generally have…white privilege” and that this privilege is “unearned.” 

He speaks of white people as if we all share the same culture, ignoring the differences of experience among immigrants and others who are white skinned but do not belong to the “dominant culture”. To make an example of myself: I felt alienated a lot in my young years as a result of having parents who did not partake in the american (especially materialistic) lifestyle. No, I wasn’t discriminated against for being from Russia per say, but (for years) my clothes did not fit in and the things the other kids did (go to the movies, mc’donalds, eating chinese food) I could not do and so those “dominant culture” kids kept away from me (resulting in perhaps depressed self esteem and poorer performance in school) It wasn’t an issue of poverty because we weren’t that poor. Doing these things was simply not a part of my parents culture. But Wise disregards such experiences or demotes them and I take issue with that. In any society where people of diverse backgrounds integrate, there will be a tug-of-war between this need to fit in and maintaining your own culture. This is normal and inevitable. It’s not a bad idea to mitigate the rifts somehow – but how?

So white children and wealthy children should be punished because of attributes they were born into/with? It reminds me of this moral dilemma story about the doctor with 5 sick patients who need different organs to survive, and one healthy man who comes to his office. Is killing this man and taking his organs to save the other patients justifiable? In the white/non-white student situation the consequences are even more muddy. Sacrificing one child for the sake of another doesn’t result in a 4x benefit...

...The reason that the presence of a non-white person in certain schools may be questioned is because affirmative action DOES rig the system! Very often standards WERE lowered to foster diversity." (emphasis is the original writers, not mine).

We have a lot of work to do. Please leave me a comment if you are unable to see the many problems with that quote. I will not take a condescending tone with you. On the contrary, I will compassionately and pain stakingly point out in very clear detail all its very problematic elements.

What is the Purpose of My Life?

The World According to Sage 101: Groups and Consciousnesses

The Hypnotized

The Empire

The Empire is one of the three core collective consciousnesses on the planet at this time. It is both a consciousness and a cabal of people. It is currently the dominant consciousness on planet earth. Its prime directive is divide and conquer. The Empire consciousness is represented throughout every important system on the planet—politics, religion, television, the film industry, economics, government, banking, finance, education, the entire criminal justice system, manufacturing and production, food production and supply, the entire entertainment industry, health/medicine and human welfare, technology, the arts and sciences, etc. The consciousness of The Empire infects, like a virus, these systems and then attempts to permeate them in order to achieve it goals universally and permanently. The degree of chaos in the world's geopolitical, socio-economic, financial and other foundational systems exists in direct proportion to the degree The Empire has been successful in permeating these systems and achieving its goals. The primary philosophical and action oriented process through which The Empire is currently choosing to control every aspect of life on the planet is through “Corporatocracy.” If this process becomes less effective, The Empire will simply find or create another one. The Empire consciousness is an anomaly. It is out of alignment with the core values of the cosmic human. While The Empire may be an anomaly, it however, is not a mistake. It is also not "bad" in the classical sense of the word. It is also necessary.

The Bridge

The Bridge is the second of the three core collective consciousnesses on the planet. It is both a consciousness and a group of people. Like The Empire, The Bridge consciousness is also represented throughout every important system on the planet. The root purpose of The Bridge is to provide a successful transition from the domination of The Empire to the updated installment of The New Earth consciousness. The Bridge consciousness is the newest of the three. It has not always been present. The need for The Bridge consciousness has come about as a direct result of the rising dominance of The Empire consciousness. It has naturally arisen as a mitigating influence. This is because The Empire consciousness is not a reflection of the natural state of consciousness of the cosmic human. People who represent the consciousness of The Bridge usually display personal attributes of both The Empire and the third core consciousness, The New Earth. Oprah Winfrey is a good example of someone displaying The Bridge consciousness. She is both highly evolved spiritually and socially yet also embraces numerous ideas and philosophies consistent with The Empire such as a seemingly full embrace of capitalism and many of its excesses. Capitalism, BTW, is an economic construction of The Empire. Many members of The American Democratic party, both as supporters and politicians, are members of The Bridge. The ultimate success of The Bridge is neither assured nor not assured.

The New Earth

The New Earth is the third of the core collective consciousnesses on the planet. It is both a consciousness and a group of people. The New Earth is really not new at all. This consciousness however, is constantly being updated to pair with the also ever evolving consciousness of The Empire. The prime directives of The New Earth are radical inclusion, cooperation, sustainability and spiritual maturity. Like The Empire and The Bridge, The New Earth consciousness is also represented throughout every important system on the planet. However, it is currently the least represented of the three. That was not always the case. The New Earth consciousness was once the dominant consciousness on planet earth. It however was called something else at one point. Throughout most of its history as being the dominant consciousness on the planet it was not called anything at all because it simply was “the way things were and the way things worked.” Its influence has been in decline for centuries while the influence of The Empire's consciousness has steadily been on the increase for centuries. A very good point of reference for understanding The Empire, The New Earth and if one reads carefully, The Bridge, is Ishmael by Daniel Quinn.

The Hypnotized

The Hypnotized are a constant background group of people who do not fully align themselves with the consciousness of any of the three core collective consciousnesses on the planet. However, they are mesmerized by and impressed with what they interpret as the sheer power of The Empire. So they tend to lead their lives in a way that makes them appear to have fully embraced The Empire. They usually have not. The popular term for these people is “sheeple.” This however is not a completely accurate portrayal of such people because sheeple implies a blind following and a giving up of all or most personal autonomy rather than a transfixed state/stage which is in fact highly capable of being broken.

The A's and B's (Angry and Bitter)

The Angry are another constant background group of people at this time. Sometimes they appear to be almost indistinguishable from The Hypnotized. They however, are ruled almost entirely by the emotions of anger and bitterness which is not true of The Hypnotized, in general. If not for their intense anger and bitterness, which in some cases, is completely understandable, certain members of The Angry and Bitter would likely embrace the consciousness of The New Earth very easily and naturally. In other cases however, people are members of this group primarily because they view themselves as not being fully vested in what they view as their birthright and entitlement to the (perceived) wonders and excesses of The Empire. Many members of The American Tea Party are good examples of this expression as are active members of all the world's white supremacy organizations.

The Asleep

As destructive a force The Angry can be in the world, I am imagining it is generally better to be a member of The Angry than it is to be a member of The Asleep. The Asleep are basically people who have been so traumatized by living in a world dominated by the consciousness of The Empire as to essentially have been anesthetized by their experiences. There are many other groups containing near casualties of The Empire—the poor, the homeless, the working poor, many people who are incarcerated in jails and prisons and large segments of “the middle class.” Someone who is also just really, really lazy or woefully disengaged from life can also be a member of The Asleep. Thankfully there are both very well known and not so well known cases of members of The Asleep who either through grace or some other process or motivation completely awakened from their slumber and became forceful agents of The New Earth consciousness. For the uninitiated The Asleep and The Hypnotized may seem indistinguishable. In some cases someone can be a member of both groups. In general however, The Asleep survive heavily on the assistance of psychotropic medication and/or through the abuse of so called illicit drugs and/or alcohol. This is not so prominently the case with The Hypnotized. Although it does tend to be more the case for The Angry and Bitter.

The Indigo Children

If one is paying very close attention, it would be difficult not to see that there are an increasing group of children being born and growing up in the world today who for lack of a better word are simply quite special. I do not know how long The indigo Children have been amongst us. There are others who are more interested in such things. I am not. I also am not completely certain of their origin nor ultimate purpose. Again, there are ample resources providing presumably accurate information about such things for those who are interested. These children possess a wisdom, gentleness, empathic nature and other positive attributes that far surpasses that of most adults currently living on the planet. These children are not perfect and of course they are also not immune from most of the horrors of life, many of which are brought about by The Empire consciousness. These children however, are very necessary, it would seem, for the future of the planet.

The Anarchists

At this stage in the game The Anarchists are, for all intents and purposes, the largest collective group of prophets the world has today. They are not an homogenous group by any means. There is great diversity among them. Some are effective. Some are not. Some are reckless and disorganized. Others are highly organized. Some are drug addicts. Others are not. Many find their way into information and technology professions including the development of new artificial intelligences. Some are also members of The Angry. Some are members of The Bridge. Some are active forces in The New Earth. Though for many, their membership in The Anarchists is primary and overriding. The Anarchists are, it would seem, essential to the ultimate success of The New Earth consciousness on the planet. The anarchists are the true revolutionaries on the planet. As such, they are represented in every core important institution on the planet including the ones that are perceived as being completely co-opted by The Empire.

The Disillusioned

The principal difference between The Disillusioned and The Anarchists is that The Disillusioned have temporarily (hopefully) forgotten who they truly are. In many cases they are former members of The Hypnotized who woke up and rightfully joined The Anarchists consciousness but unfortunately hadn't quite gotten all the hypnotized energy out of their system yet. Or they experienced some trauma like a nasty divorce or a tragic lay-off or some other big loss and effectively lost their way. The Disillusioned are often like the "Cypher" character in The Matrix. Take another red pill, go back down the rabbits hole and call it a day dudes and dudettes!

The Architects

The Architects are some of the most interesting, charismatic, complex and sometimes more controversial people on the planet. Architects are the wizards, mystics, creators and energetic shape shifters of the earth. Architects are able to fluidly and effortlessly move between the ranks of The Empire, The Bridge, The New Earth and The Anarchists with an authentic embodiment of the energy of each one. This fluidity is one of the hallmarks of The Architects. They are deeply aware that there is no real division between any of the groups and consciousnesses on the planet. Many people who are not Architects are also aware of this. Many members of The New Earth, for example, are very aware of this. Architects however, know this on another level altogether. Architects are not typically found in what in America at least, is viewed as “the mainstream.” Architects are found among the homeless in surprising numbers, for example. They are often found in other parts of a culture that are rather dismissed or ignored by the masses. They are found in some of the most esteemed parts of a culture as well though usually in the background. Rarely are they in the foreground. Any major transformation, in any direction, on the earth, is dependent upon the guidance and participation of The Architects.

...I'm also making all this up. Or am I?!?!

Friendships Between Black Men and White Women, Part I

In 1990 I enjoyed a very pleasant and nice lunch with a white female friend at a restaurant in a mid-sized Central Kentucky city. This was something we did frequently. We had arrived at the restaurant in my friends car. When we returned to her car to head home, someone had scrawled in the dirt on the car the words “nigger lover” on one of the car doors.

Four years later in the same state though in a different city approximately 30 miles away, I went to a different restaurant, a Denny's, after 1 am with several white gay male friends after having socialized together at a local gay bar until the bars closing time. The Denny's was located in one of the more diverse neighborhoods in this city of between 250,000 and 300,000. The neighborhood had a significant number though not a majority of African American residents. We all felt very comfortable in the neighborhood. We had all been to this Denny's as a group many times before. We were all very good friends and we always had a great time whenever we were all together. That early morning outing was no exception.

Sometime between our order being taken and when our food arrived, a young white woman we had not noticed earlier (I did say we were a group of gay men didn't I) walked up to a table not far from ours where a young black man and a young white woman were seated. The one white woman walked right up to the table, got about a foot from the face of the young woman sitting there and said in what seemed to be the loudest voice she could muster, “You are a disgrace to your race you f*king b*tch. You're nothing but a f*king nigger lover. Somebody ought to slap some f*king sense into you. And I just may be the one to do it”

It was an early Saturday morning. This Denny's was one of the few places open in the city after hours. Hence, it was fairly well packed with an extremely diverse group of people many of whom had similarly arrived from various watering holes throughout the city for an early morning snack or meal. There was a substantial wait staff on hand and there was a night shift manager on the premises who was a muscular white male who was the size and build of a professional wrestler. He appeared to be in his late 20s to early 30s.

The woman who came to the table of the black man and white woman did not stop her tirade after her initial outburst. She went on and on for what seemed like an eternity though in reality it was probably around 10 minutes. She never once acknowledged nor looked in the direction of the black man whatsoever. Her full and undivided attention was searingly focused on the other white woman. At one point she angrily challenged the woman sitting at the table to go outside with her and engage in a fight. The table she herself had been sitting at which contained a group of white men and woman loudly cheered her on when she proposed that challenge. For their part, the black man and the white woman sitting at the table didn't say a word. From the instant the one white woman had opened her mouth they lowered their heads and seemed to be wishing they each had the superpower of invisibility. None of the wait staff said a word throughout the entire tirade. The manager, who was visible to everyone throughout the incident, didn't say a word and took no action. No one in the restaurant said a word nor took any action. Finally, one of the white gay men at our table jumped up and rushed over to the manager, got in his face and screamed, “Will you call the f*king police or something a-hole!” At this, the screaming woman and all of her friends collected themselves and rushed out of the restaurant. I didn't notice if they paid their bill or not. The young black man and young white woman at the table kept their collective heads lowered, speechless. They were obviously traumatized. Everyone at my table openly vowed to never return to the restaurant again. I don't know about the others but I kept that promise. I and no one in the restaurant likely had any idea if the black man and white woman at the table were romantically linked or merely had a platonic relationship. There was no overt affection expressed between them. I for one have gone out numerous times and at all hours of the day and night with many different white female friends.

Now, when these two events took place I was in my early to mid 30s. I have other stories I could tell that both pre-date and post-date these two. They are stories that take place in this same part of the country and in other parts of the country as well. They are stories that occur in communities much smaller and communities much larger than these two. The common denominator in all of them is that they involve me—a black man, and at least one of my white female friends. For many years I have had many close and important relationships with white women. Not all of the stories I could tell involves racism and/or overt bigotry. They each however, express some of the numerous and complex dynamics that can be present whenever black men and white woman develop friendships in a decidedly race and gender conscious culture and where black men and white woman are often viewed as being at opposing ends of that cultural channel. So many things come into play here—power dynamics, money, socioeconomic statuses, sexuality, classism, perceived gender and race based cultural worth, etc. The most horrifying of the stories I could tell involves me and one of my very closest white female friends who at the time the story takes place was pregnant. Hint: It too took place in The American South and the lovely people we encountered on that fateful day mistakenly made the assumption I was the father of my friends unborn child...

©Raven/Sage Mahosadha

Today's Wisdom From Audre Lorde: There is no Hierarchy of Oppressions

Audre Lorde, 1980

There Is No Hierarchy of Oppressions                           

I was born Black, and a woman. I am trying to become the strongest person I can become to live the life I have been given and to help effect change toward a liveable future for this earth and for my children. As a Black, lesbian, feminist, socialist, poet, mother of two including one boy and a member of an interracial couple, I usually find myself part of some group in which the majority defines me as deviant, difficult, inferior or just plain "wrong."

From my membership in all of these groups I have learned that oppression and the intolerance of difference come in all shapes and sexes and colors and sexualities; and that among those of us who share the goals of liberation and a workable future for our children, there can be no hierarchies of oppression. I have learned that sexism (a belief in the inherent superiority of one sex over all others and thereby its right to dominance) and heterosexism (a belief in the inherent superiority of one pattern of loving over all others and thereby its right to dominance) both arise from the same source as racism-- a belief in the inherent superiority of one race over all others and thereby its right to dominance.

"Oh," says a voice from the Black community, "but being Black is NORMAL!" Well, I and many Black people of my age can remember grimly the days when it didn't used to be!

I simply do not believe that one aspect of myself can possibly profit from the oppression of any other part of my identity. I know that my people cannot possibly profit from the oppression of any other group which seeks the right to peaceful existence. Rather, we diminish ourselves by denying to others what we have shed blood to obtain for our children. And those children need to learn that they do not have to become like each other in order to work together for a future they will all share.

The increasing attacks upon lesbians and gay men are only an introduction to the increasing attacks upon all Black people, for wherever oppression manifests itself in this country, Black people are potential victims. And it is a standard of right-wing cynicism to encourage members of oppressed groups to act against each other, and so long as we are divided because of our particular identities we cannot join together in effective political action.

Within the lesbian community I am Black, and within the Black community I am a lesbian. Any attack against Black people is a lesbian and gay issue, because I and thousands of other Black women are part of the lesbian community. Any attack against lesbians and gays is a Black issue, because thousands of lesbians and gay men are Black. There is no hierarchy of oppression.

It is not accidental that the Family Protection Act, which is virulently anti-woman and anti-Black, is also anti-gay. As a Black person, I know who my enemies are, and when the Ku Klux Klan goes to court in Detroit to try and force the Board of Education to remove books the Klan believes "hint at homosexuality," then I know I cannot afford the luxury of fighting one form of oppression only. I cannot afford to believe that freedom from intolerance is the right of only one particular group. And I cannot afford to choose between the fronts upon which I must battle these forces of discrimination, .wherever they appear to destroy me. And when they appear to destroy me, it will not be long before they appear to destroy you.

Spiritual Practice, Racism, White Privilege and the Spiritual Concept of Liberation (Part I)

I belong to many spiritually oriented groups. I have for a very long time. I know an exceptionally large number of people who consider themselves to be anywhere from moderately to significantly “spiritual.” Many of these people do not talk about or even acknowledge racism in their everyday and and in some cases voluminous writings, discourses and “satsangas.” Even fewer talk about or even acknowledge white privilege. Why is this? I believe a large part of the answer lies in the concept of liberation as defined and employed by a large and diverse cross section of spiritual seekers.

More specifically, many so called spiritual seekers have a concept of liberation that is heavily weighted toward personal liberation. In other words it is a liberation that places emphasis on individual enlightenment and achievement. Meaning it de-emphasizes, de-legitimizes and in its more extreme cases effectively disappears the understanding of liberation as a direct result of the combination of spiritual practice and social justice action. Though many who view themselves as “highly spiritual” will also often give superficial and for them, adequate lip service to some of the more basic ideas that find a much more distilled and developed expression in such teachings as Engaged Buddhism as taught by spiritual masters such as Thich Nhat Hanh and others.

Second, being a spiritual seeker/person does not unfortunately automatically exempt one from being a human being. And we human beings notoriously avoid things that make us uncomfortable. Racism and white privilege are exceedingly uncomfortable conversations in this culture. This is why Tim Wise, antiracism and white privilege teacher and essayist extraordinaire, receives so many death threats and on a very regular basis. Oddly, it is this very type of avoidance that many spiritual practices and teachings would have us deeply explore, investigate and come to terms with. Habit energy however, is oftentimes stronger and more influential than even the most sublime and beautiful spiritual teachings. So when habit energy, especially when enhanced with a certain type of abstract intellectualism, exist in a spiritual seeker, denial and avoidance are often the result.

So, for those keeping score, we so far have concern with and the primacy of personal liberation and habit energy as reasons why more spiritual people do not talk about and try to actively impact social understanding and social change around the issues of racism and white privilege. To these we can now add what I like to call “above the fray-ism.” Above the fray-ism is when so called spiritual or religious people make a distinction and draw lines of demarcation between their psycho-emotional lives, their social observation and participation and their spiritual aspirations. The so called spiritual aspirations become the locus of focus while psycho-emotional and social observation and participation become the frays one must effectively rise above. Certain strains of neo-advitin (with an ostensibly Hindu foundation) philosophy but also numerous strains of fundamental Christianity and other fundamental religious/spiritual expressions are good examples of systems that employ above the fray-ism an an integral aspect of their belief systems. Above the fray-ism of course does not just nullify discussions of racism and white privilege it nullifies pretty much all discussions of anything that could be considered a social ill, problem or concern. Another, more basic understanding of above the fray-ism is to simply call it denial. Though it is a type of denial that includes some elements that are not necessarily found in plain ole, run of the mill denial. There are expressions of self righteousness and bullying here that don't always show up in plain ole, run of the mill denial. One can, for example, believe global warming simply does not exist with no other energy maintaining that belief other than ignorance, environmental blindness and perhaps a certain level of naiveté. The type of denial I am speaking of here has all the elements of run of the mill denial with the additional strong belief that others simply are not as smart, evolved, aware or conscious with the added strong need to convince those others of all of that.

Finally, there is probably privilege and perhaps even racism experienced by some of the spiritual people in question here and that prevents such spiritual people from speaking out against and about white privilege and racism. Aside from politicians and the CEOs of many large corporations and certain large non-profits, I have not observed too many people who are able to expertly talk out of both sides of their mouths with extreme and pathological proficiency while simultaneously convincing the masses (or their constituency) of their sincerity. In other words, some spiritual people probably don't speak out too much about racism and white privilege because they are consciously or unconsciously, actively or passively--psychologically, emotionally, financially and/or in other ways, participants in and beneficiaries of both.

Some Things Do Not Get Better With Time: A Speech By Black Panther Huey Newton in 1970 That Still Sets The Standard in 2011

Dr. Huey P. Newton, PhD.

The Women's Liberation and Gay Liberation Movements

 During the past few years strong movements have developed among women and among homosexuals seeking their liberation. There has been some uncertainty about how to relate to these movements.


Whatever your personal opinions and your insecurities about homosexuality and the various liberation movements among homosexuals and women (and I speak of the homosexuals and women as oppressed groups), we should try to unite with them in a revolutionary fashion. I say ” whatever your insecurities are” because as we very well know, sometimes our first instinct is to want to hit a homosexual in the mouth, and want a woman to be quiet. We want to hit a homosexual in the mouth because we are afraid that we might be homosexual; and we want to hit the women or shut her up because we are afraid that she might castrate us, or take the nuts that we might not have to start with.


We must gain security in ourselves and therefore have respect and feelings for all oppressed people. We must not use the racist attitude that the White racists use against our people because they are Black and poor. Many times the poorest White person is the most racist because he is afraid that he might lose something, or discover something that he does not have. So you’re some kind of a threat to him. This kind of psychology is in operation when we view oppressed people and we are angry with them because of their particular kind of behavior, or their particular kind of deviation from the established norm.


Remember, we have not established a revolutionary value system; we are only in the process of establishing it. I do not remember our ever constituting any value that said that a revolutionary must say offensive things towards homosexuals, or that a revolutionary should make sure that women do not speak out about their own particular kind of oppression. As a matter of fact, it is just the opposite: we say that we recognize the women’s right to be free. We have not said much about the homosexual at all, but we must relate to the homosexual movement because it is a real thing. And I know through reading, and through my life experience and observations that homosexuals are not given freedom and liberty by anyone in the society. They might be the most oppressed people in the society.


And what made them homosexual? Perhaps it’s a phenomenon that I don’t understand entirely. Some people say that it is the decadence of capitalism. I don’t know if that is the case; I rather doubt it. But whatever the case is, we know that homosexuality is a fact that exists, and we must understand it in its purest form: that is, a person should have the freedom to use his body in whatever way he wants.


That is not endorsing things in homosexuality that we wouldn’t view as revolutionary. But there is nothing to say that a homosexual cannot also be a revolutionary. And maybe I’m now injecting some of my prejudice by saying that “even a homosexual can be a revolutionary.” Quite the contrary, maybe a homosexual could be the most revolutionary. When we have revolutionary conferences, rallies, and demonstrations, there should be full participation of the gay liberation movement and the women’s liberation movement. Some groups might be more revolutionary than others. We should not use the actions of a few to say that they are all reactionary or counterrevolutionary, because they are not.


We should deal with the factions just as we deal with any other group or party that claims to be revolutionary. We should try to judge, somehow, whether they are operating in a sincere revolutionary fashion and from a really oppressed situation. (And we will grant that if they are women they are probably oppressed.) If they do things that are unrevolutionary or counterrevolutionary, then criticize that action. If we feel that the group in spirit means to be revolutionary in practice, but they make mistakes in interpretation of the revolutionary philosophy, or they do not understand the dialectics of the social forces in operation, we should criticize that and not criticize them because they are women trying to be free. And the same is true for homosexuals. We should never say a whole movement is dishonest when in fact they are trying to be honest. They are just making honest mistakes. Friends are allowed to make mistakes. The enemy is not allowed to make mistakes because his whole existence is a mistake, and we suffer from it. But the women’s liberation front and gay liberation front are our friends, they are our potential allies, and we need as many allies as possible.


We should be willing to discuss the insecurities that many people have about homosexuality. When I say “insecurities,” I mean the fear that they are some kind of threat to our manhood. I can understand this fear. Because of the long conditioning process which builds insecurity in the American male, homosexuality might produce certain hang-ups in us. I have hang-ups myself about male homosexuality. But on the other hand, I have no hang-up about female homosexuality. And that is a phenomenon in itself. I think it is probably because male homosexuality is a threat to me and female homosexuality is not.


We should be careful about using those terms that might turn our friends off. The terms “faggot” and “punk” should be deleted from our vocabulary, and especially we should not attach names normally designed for homosexuals to men who are enemies of the people, such as Nixon or Mitchell. Homosexuals are not enemies of the people.


We should try to form a working coalition with the gay liberation and women’s liberation groups. We must always handle social forces in the most appropriate manner.