Independent economic activity by and among blacks has long been historically forbidden, judging from such racist and heinous occurrences as: Wilmington, North Carolina; Memphis, Tennessee ; Atlanta, Georgia; Rosewood , Florida; Springfield , Missouri ; Springfield, Illinois; and Tulsa, Oklahoma .
In these cities and other sites, urban and rural, from the 1890s through the 1930s, prosperous, self-supporting black communities were burned to the ground by envious whites on various pretexts--many involving the supposed "honor" of white women--over several days. White law enforcement authorities either ignored or participated in these horrific acts that involved lynchings, forced evictions, land confiscation, unrestrained mob rule, destruction and/or theft of personal property.
This deracination of black businesses and business leaders explains, (given the legal complicity of the courts, prosecutors, media, and police), in very large measure, the lack of and the loss of that collective self-help economic tradition and inclination in black communities today. Its roots were destroyed. Where, for example, would white businesses be, if similar atrocities had been committed against such white, iconic business predecessors as Carnegie or Mellon or Rockefeller or J.P. Morgan, and their families and properties?
That same spirit of hostility toward black entrepreneurs exists today. It is primarily manifested through state regulatory agencies and other instruments of state police power on all levels in their disparate treatment .
Its exercise resulted in, mushroomed in, the so-called "War on Drugs" of the 1980s, under Reagan, that yet continues under both Democrat and Republican administrations. In this domestic "war" hundred of billions of their own tax dollars dollars were spent to abolish independent economic activity among blacks.
Blacks were disproportionately thwarted, attacked and penalized by Congress, states, and media, for selling to survive an untaxed substance, as brilliantly outlined by Michelle Alexander in her classic compendium, THE NEW JIM CROW.
I posit that it was the "untaxed" independent economic activity of blacks that was the object, not the deleterious effects of the drugs, that was the object or the focus of the Congress and of the powers-that-be in that cruelly destructive war. The public health or welfare of black people was certainly not their concern, then or now! Otherwise, the "War on Poverty," 1965-1973, would have lasted at least as long as the abominable drug war, 1982-2014.
Similarly the "untaxed" independent economic activity of Eric Garner is what caused his death in his sale of loose, untaxed cigarettes. To the police he represented the same thing as a drug dealer. So, the product sold does not matter; the color and productivity of the seller does matter.
This is a working hypothesis only. If you see matters differently speak up!
Monday, December 22, 2014
FORBIDDEN: INDEPENDENT BLACK ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
FORBIDDEN: independent Black Economic Activity
Independent economic activity by and among blacks has long been historically forbidden, judging from such racist and heinous occurrences as: Wilmington, North Carolina; Memphis, Tennessee ; Atlanta, Georgia; Rosewood , Florida; Springfield , Missouri ; Springfield, Illinois; and Tulsa, Oklahoma .
In these cities and other sites, urban and rural, from the 1890s through the 1930s, prosperous, self-supporting black communities were burned to the ground by envious whites on various pretexts--many involving the supposed "honor" of white women--over several days. White law enforcement authorities either ignored or participated in these horrific acts that involved lynchings, forced evictions, land confiscation, unrestrained mob rule, destruction and/or theft of personal property.
This deracination of black businesses and business leaders explains, (given the legal complicity of the courts, prosecutors, media, and police), in very large measure, the lack of and the loss of that collective self-help economic tradition and inclination in black communities today. Its roots were destroyed. Where, for example, would white businesses be, if similar atrocities had been committed against such white, iconic business predecessors as Carnegie or Mellon or Rockefeller or J.P. Morgan, and their families and properties?
That same spirit of hostility toward black entrepreneurs exists today. It is primarily manifested through state regulatory agencies and other instruments of state police power on all levels in their disparate treatment .
Its exercise resulted in, mushroomed in, the so-called "War on Drugs" of the 1980s, under Reagan, that yet continues under both Democrat and Republican administrations. In this domestic "war" hundred of billions of their own tax dollars dollars were spent to abolish independent economic activity among blacks.
Blacks were disproportionately thwarted, attacked and penalized by Congress, states, and media, for selling to survive an untaxed substance, as brilliantly outlined by Michelle Alexander in her classic compendium, THE NEW JIM CROW.
I posit that it was the "untaxed" independent economic activity of blacks that was the object, not the deleterious effects of the drugs, that was the object or the focus of the Congress and of the powers-that-be in that cruelly destructive war. The public health or welfare of black people was certainly not their concern, then or now! Otherwise, the "War on Poverty," 1965-1973, would have lasted at least as long as the abominable drug war, 1982-2014.
Similarly the "untaxed" independent economic activity of Eric Garner is what caused his death in his sale of loose, untaxed cigarettes. To the police he represented the same thing as a drug dealer. So, the product sold does not matter; the color and productivity of the seller does matter.
This is a working hypothesis only. If you see matters differently speak up!
Independent economic activity by and among blacks has long been historically forbidden, judging from such racist and heinous occurrences as: Wilmington, North Carolina; Memphis, Tennessee ; Atlanta, Georgia; Rosewood , Florida; Springfield , Missouri ; Springfield, Illinois; and Tulsa, Oklahoma .
In these cities and other sites, urban and rural, from the 1890s through the 1930s, prosperous, self-supporting black communities were burned to the ground by envious whites on various pretexts--many involving the supposed "honor" of white women--over several days. White law enforcement authorities either ignored or participated in these horrific acts that involved lynchings, forced evictions, land confiscation, unrestrained mob rule, destruction and/or theft of personal property.
This deracination of black businesses and business leaders explains, (given the legal complicity of the courts, prosecutors, media, and police), in very large measure, the lack of and the loss of that collective self-help economic tradition and inclination in black communities today. Its roots were destroyed. Where, for example, would white businesses be, if similar atrocities had been committed against such white, iconic business predecessors as Carnegie or Mellon or Rockefeller or J.P. Morgan, and their families and properties?
That same spirit of hostility toward black entrepreneurs exists today. It is primarily manifested through state regulatory agencies and other instruments of state police power on all levels in their disparate treatment .
Its exercise resulted in, mushroomed in, the so-called "War on Drugs" of the 1980s, under Reagan, that yet continues under both Democrat and Republican administrations. In this domestic "war" hundred of billions of their own tax dollars dollars were spent to abolish independent economic activity among blacks.
Blacks were disproportionately thwarted, attacked and penalized by Congress, states, and media, for selling to survive an untaxed substance, as brilliantly outlined by Michelle Alexander in her classic compendium, THE NEW JIM CROW.
I posit that it was the "untaxed" independent economic activity of blacks that was the object, not the deleterious effects of the drugs, that was the object or the focus of the Congress and of the powers-that-be in that cruelly destructive war. The public health or welfare of black people was certainly not their concern, then or now! Otherwise, the "War on Poverty," 1965-1973, would have lasted at least as long as the abominable drug war, 1982-2014.
Similarly the "untaxed" independent economic activity of Eric Garner is what caused his death in his sale of loose, untaxed cigarettes. To the police he represented the same thing as a drug dealer. So, the product sold does not matter; the color and productivity of the seller does matter.
This is a working hypothesis only. If you see matters differently speak up!
