Controversy About "The Black Agenda"

[Smiley and West]

Sharpton vs West Exclusive: West goes behind the scenes of his MSNBC debate with Rev. Al Sharpton.     As we draw closer to the election year, the topic of a Black Agenda, or lack thereof, remains at the center of much heated discourse amongst public intellectuals and political pundits.  Recently Dr. Cornel West and Rev. Al Sharpton – two of America’s most respected Black leaders – engaged in such a debate on MSNBC with Ed Schutlz.  Although the conversation was torrid, the subject of a Black Agenda is gaining more attention. West: There is a context in the nation that a criticism of President Obama is an attempt to support right wing vicious attacks. The recent heated exchange with my dear brother Al Sharpton is not primarily about him, me or even the President.  What’s the focus: How we fight for poor and working people. Tune in to Smiley & West this weekend as I reflect more on the subject.   For Dr. West's Full Statement, visit  www.CornelWest.com

[lisa swytzer]

from the bible to where pack this TIME TO RUN!

[L. Madd]

My concern with West and Smiley, is that Mr. Smiley, has been upset since the President won, his position. Tavis Smiley was for Hilary Clinton, he  also had declared himself the leader of Black America. Since hat time he has chosen to fight the President. Dr. West, has been in a mind of being critical of the President since the election.  If the two could have stepped outside of themselves, and their anger, it is possible that, alone with the President we could have gained more ground. Where were they doing midterm elections?

 It is sad that at this day and time we still choose not to help each other but what benefits us. Mr. Smiley has done well off the backs of middle class Blacks, and Dr. West, has not done so bad himself. My concern now is what are they doing more than or alone with the President to better this nation other than talk, and then publish.

[Penguin Board of Directors]

AF,

The question has actually not advanced to the courts yet where, as you rightly observed, there might be actual or constructive miscarriage of justice. The Fair Lady is not always fair. We should keep working on our foibles as part of the imperfections of human society.

The question is still at the level of committing a crime or what appears to be the committing of a crime. It should not matter whether the suspect is blue or green, left-leaning or right-leaning, republican or democrat, liberal or conservative.

The question again was

"Should it matter whether it is a democrat or a republican that ends up refrigerating some sting operation bribe-money?"

Avid Follower said:

YA, I must disagree with you only in totality.  "Should it matter whether it is a democrat or a republican that ends up refrigerating some sting operation bribe-money?" When it comes down to WHOM dispenses justice, yes it does matter as to who and what the judge and the jury's makeup is.  This is why for example, some court cases are moved to and settled in another county/state or assigned a different judge.  More is involved than a person's belief in the principles of a political party affiliation:  democrat, republican, communist, independent . . .

Yomi Ace said:

AF,

The labels may not even be as disconcerting as their attached stigma. At other times, they are thoroughly innocuous. If X were rich because, like Bill Gates, X jettisoned school, pursued business and succeeded beyond his imagination, great job. If Y were rich because Y, like Bernard Madoff, milked innocent people, then Y owed society some explanation. One could multiply examples in other areas or endeavors. 

Social grouping is arranged and re-arranged on these grounds, but attitude may make all the difference. Do we have democrats and republicans? Yes, we do. Should it matter whether it is a democrat or a republican that ends up refrigerating some sting operation bribe-money? Nope. It should not.      

[joe]

spot on this point as well..I hesitated in an earlier comment to bring this point out, but yes..Tavis to my observation has not quite gotten over the primaries.

L. Madd said:

My concern with West and Smiley, is that Mr. Smiley, has been upset since the President won, his position. Tavis Smiley was for Hilary Clinton, he  also had declared himself the leader of Black America. Since hat time he has chosen to fight the President. Dr. West, has been in a mind of being critical of the President since the election.  If the two could have stepped outside of themselves, and their anger, it is possible that, alone with the President we could have gained more ground. Where were they doing midterm elections?

 It is sad that at this day and time we still choose not to help each other but what benefits us. Mr. Smiley has done well off the backs of middle class Blacks, and Dr. West, has not done so bad himself. My concern now is what are they doing more than or alone with the President to better this nation other than talk, and then publish.

[Onaje Lott]

The purpose of quotation marks surrounding the words "new negro" (for my purposes) has nothing to do with advancing dialogue. It speaks to a mentality of seperation that people adopt when they start seeing themselves above or separate of the community that raised and nurtured them. Access doesn't make you a new person is the short of it. If you don't get that concept or don't adopt the same view that is cool. Not my purpose, but these ideas of "new" (new middle class for instance) is detrimental as far as I'm concerned. Choosing sides on communal issues just lead to delayed results...

joe said:

I don't know that using terms like the 'New Negro', whatever that means, advances the dialog any more than Dr. West's quote concern about the President being the black face of..x,y,z. 

The set up of the question is a interesting one, as though there is a monolith called 'The Black Agenda'.

If the agenda is about anything I suspect, it is about what a majority of Americans are concerned about, and that is the problem with unchecked corporate power, wealth and access, at the expense of those who form the people of these United States.

 

With respect, I don't know that the initial framing of the question, nor the language used advances the dialog, and frankly, Dr. West who I respect as well as Rev. Sharpton though disagreeing sharply[no pun intended] with both of them more times than a few-I don't know that Dr. West's insistance on saying in a contentious fashion that if you don't agree with him that you are giving cover-is begging the question. What ever work Dr.West has done for the poor, he doesn't have monopoly on this, and there is room for authentic and honest disagreement, and the person's motivations or actions not be called into question.

Yomi Ace said:

Onaje,

Much appreciated. Incrementally, we can now begin to hope for some semblance of informed discourse on matters of commonality and national importance. All of this was beginning to sound like another day at the barber's. 

 

 

 

Onaje Lott said:

This isn't an "Us vs Them" thing, so to make it out to be that way only speaks to an individuals on lack of perspective and desire to see all people rise above the nonsense...

 

It does have a feel like a line has been or is soon to be drawn...I remember the initial back lash Tavis took for his early concern about some of the positions that the President was taking. It was reduced to jealousy, indignation and general "crabs in the barrel" mentality...I even started to look at Tavis differently...once the figurehead of this togetherness movement of people that seemed to truly think/do for the betterment of our community in a nation that never made it a priority to becoming a malcontent of his own support structure...

 

I don't think this is the case...People seem so fanatical about things that they can't find a way to be critical and supportive in one action...It isn't that hard. We do it as (GOOD) parents, spouses, and friends. It isn't negative to hold a mirror up to Obama or remind him of what he once stood on. If for nothing else to have him plainly speak to his change of rationale or share new experiences that have lead to a decision that comes across as uncharacteristic...

 

I like the discourse. I don't like that it is being spent and mutated into a tear among the few community focused leaders. I hope Sharpton isn't reflecting the "New Negro" mentality that is willing to accept less for the whole as long as he himself has greater access to promote and market his brand. In the same way I hope Tavis and Dr. West aren't taking this anti-fan perspective (which is best) for Obama and many things that are of Government too far. It is one thing to warn and hold accountable, but there should always be balance.

 

I look forward to being more informed on what this is about and where it will go.

[Brenda]

I agree...he (Tavis) should move forward before he turns into a pillar of salt.  We can not continue looking backward but create robust startegies that facilitate change both internal and external.  I think that Tavis' jealousy has entrapped his mind and harden his heart.  And West is running a close second.  

joe said:

spot on this point as well..I hesitated in an earlier comment to bring this point out, but yes..Tavis to my observation has not quite gotten over the primaries.

L. Madd said:

My concern with West and Smiley, is that Mr. Smiley, has been upset since the President won, his position. Tavis Smiley was for Hilary Clinton, he  also had declared himself the leader of Black America. Since hat time he has chosen to fight the President. Dr. West, has been in a mind of being critical of the President since the election.  If the two could have stepped outside of themselves, and their anger, it is possible that, alone with the President we could have gained more ground. Where were they doing midterm elections?

 It is sad that at this day and time we still choose not to help each other but what benefits us. Mr. Smiley has done well off the backs of middle class Blacks, and Dr. West, has not done so bad himself. My concern now is what are they doing more than or alone with the President to better this nation other than talk, and then publish.

[Byard Pidgeon]

Obama's "deficit plan" speech today was very good. He was saying the right things, and in the right context...and part of that context was unstated..."veto". Without saying it directly, he made it clear that he'll veto anything that he feels will hurt those who are most vulnerable.

It was somewhat inspiring, even though with every little lift of inspiration, I had to remember how many times what he's said is nothing like what he's done. Will this be a shining hour, or another dull disappointment?

[One Iam]

Obama caves in, where is the public health option?  Are the Bush tax cuts for the rich still in place?  Is Gitmo open for business?  Is there more transparency in Federal government or less?  Can they still tap your phone without a warrant?  Are there any US troops in Iraq?

 

Byard Pidgeon said:

Obama's "deficit plan" speech today was very good. He was saying the right things, and in the right context...and part of that context was unstated..."veto". Without saying it directly, he made it clear that he'll veto anything that he feels will hurt those who are most vulnerable.

It was somewhat inspiring, even though with every little lift of inspiration, I had to remember how many times what he's said is nothing like what he's done. Will this be a shining hour, or another dull disappointment?

[jrsteele]

Let me clarify; my brothas, when I say the violent take it by force...we may appear to have been forceful when in reality it is are zeal, ardor, passion, or down-right fiery hottness that make us want to jump on the band-wagon and take over the drivers seat (black agenda).

Mustafa Ansari said:

Brother Steele, I was not talking about force. Indigenous status recognition is an 'election' through an insular voting process in our barbershops. salons, churches and mosques. Force is unnecessary unless the US goes "Gaddafi" on us, which the US can hardly do after its presentations to the UN of Libya.

[Bennetta]

Although Rev Sharpton undeniably has a proven record of fighting for the Poor and Minorities on a variety of Civil Rights issues, and up to now, has always boldly spoke up for issues near and dear to me, I do not agree with his assertion that CONGRESS and NOT THE PRESIDENT is to blame for the poor being left out due to Congress not fighting hard enough to push needed Bills through. I think our current waive of budget, economic, unemployment, deficit, military and civil liberties issues that have made the Middle Class unidentifiable and the Poor invisible is collectively the blame of Congress, Senate and President though the buck stops with the U.S. Chief Executive who has repeatedly shown himself to be Indecisive, way too Centrist and sadly Obama has also repeatedly demonstrated "questionable wisdom" such as:

• BUDGET SCARE: Do you guys even realize that the Budget that recently almost lead to a government shutdown was actually the budget from LAST YEAR (Oct 2010-Oct 2011) and should have already been voted on LAST YEAR WHILE WE STILL HAD A MAJORITY DEMOCRATIC SENATE, MAJORITY DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL HOUSE AND DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT (perfect voting situation for any Presidential Administration!).  Yet the Obama Administration gambled on this advantage and LOST.  He chose to delay budget vote in Oct because he feared it might negatively impact the November Election and I guess we all remember what happened during the November Election.  So since we obviously lost the House democratic majority in November then isn’t it obvious that we should have went ahead and voted on budget BEFORE new Republican Congress came to be?  Just think he could have gotten anything he wanted in that budget if he would have merely done so in accordance with law back in Oct or at least BEFORE Republican House took over in Jan 2011....BIG MISTAKE!

• COMPROMISED HEALTHCARE PLAN: Whatever happened to The Option Plan? As a matter of basic managerial prioritiizing, I feel it was a very questionable decision for Obama to spend a full year on this compromised healthcare plan that DOES NOT EVEN GO INTO EFFECT BENEFIT-WISE UNTIL 2014 (although important, CLEARLY NOT A TOP PRIORITY) while American unemployment was at or around 10% and higher in some cities.....he seemed completely disconnected to the People’s Suffering and Fear of losing their jobs & homes, feeding their kids, growing homelessness, etc.  The ONLY portion of the Healthcare’s benefit that is immediate is the extended age of depndents.  ALL OTHER AREAS OF THIS COMPROMISED HEALTHCARE PLAN WON’T EVEN GO INTO EFFECT UNTIL 2014 so I think it would have been more conducive for President Obama to have spent this time working on developing real Job Creation Committees and Bills and even hire an independent Global Human Resources consulting firm to help lead the committee discussions with ideas for sustainable job creation and vocational training programs, etc.  At least it would have shown an EFFORT to address the Critical State of Unemployment.  Unemployment should have been treated just as serious as Economic Recession whereas president formed an Economic Committee, he also desperately needed a specific Jobs Creation Committee with independent members from various industries, sectors and job functions to help our legislators come up with a Jobs Creation BILL.

• I WON’T EVEN MENTION GROWING WARS AND FINANCING OF WARS

Clearly our beloved President is losing his way a bit and we must care enough about him and His success to share with him the TRUTH so that he may began to devise real solutions to address matters related to the POOR and MIDDLE CLASS and hence find his way back to the brilliant “common sense” and Truly Democratic President we all voted for two years ago.  

[joe]

I know what you meant, and I don't know that it advances dialog. But that being said, it use

certainly does impact dialog, if what you are meaning is 'separation from a community that nurtured you'

that is a direct impact on that right?

Onaje Lott said:

The purpose of quotation marks surrounding the words "new negro" (for my purposes) has nothing to do with advancing dialogue. It speaks to a mentality of seperation that people adopt when they start seeing themselves above or separate of the community that raised and nurtured them. Access doesn't make you a new person is the short of it. If you don't get that concept or don't adopt the same view that is cool. Not my purpose, but these ideas of "new" (new middle class for instance) is detrimental as far as I'm concerned. Choosing sides on communal issues just lead to delayed results...

joe said:

I don't know that using terms like the 'New Negro', whatever that means, advances the dialog any more than Dr. West's quote concern about the President being the black face of..x,y,z. 

The set up of the question is a interesting one, as though there is a monolith called 'The Black Agenda'.

If the agenda is about anything I suspect, it is about what a majority of Americans are concerned about, and that is the problem with unchecked corporate power, wealth and access, at the expense of those who form the people of these United States.

 

With respect, I don't know that the initial framing of the question, nor the language used advances the dialog, and frankly, Dr. West who I respect as well as Rev. Sharpton though disagreeing sharply[no pun intended] with both of them more times than a few-I don't know that Dr. West's insistance on saying in a contentious fashion that if you don't agree with him that you are giving cover-is begging the question. What ever work Dr.West has done for the poor, he doesn't have monopoly on this, and there is room for authentic and honest disagreement, and the person's motivations or actions not be called into question.

Yomi Ace said:

Onaje,

Much appreciated. Incrementally, we can now begin to hope for some semblance of informed discourse on matters of commonality and national importance. All of this was beginning to sound like another day at the barber's. 

 

 

 

Onaje Lott said:

This isn't an "Us vs Them" thing, so to make it out to be that way only speaks to an individuals on lack of perspective and desire to see all people rise above the nonsense...

 

It does have a feel like a line has been or is soon to be drawn...I remember the initial back lash Tavis took for his early concern about some of the positions that the President was taking. It was reduced to jealousy, indignation and general "crabs in the barrel" mentality...I even started to look at Tavis differently...once the figurehead of this togetherness movement of people that seemed to truly think/do for the betterment of our community in a nation that never made it a priority to becoming a malcontent of his own support structure...

 

I don't think this is the case...People seem so fanatical about things that they can't find a way to be critical and supportive in one action...It isn't that hard. We do it as (GOOD) parents, spouses, and friends. It isn't negative to hold a mirror up to Obama or remind him of what he once stood on. If for nothing else to have him plainly speak to his change of rationale or share new experiences that have lead to a decision that comes across as uncharacteristic...

 

I like the discourse. I don't like that it is being spent and mutated into a tear among the few community focused leaders. I hope Sharpton isn't reflecting the "New Negro" mentality that is willing to accept less for the whole as long as he himself has greater access to promote and market his brand. In the same way I hope Tavis and Dr. West aren't taking this anti-fan perspective (which is best) for Obama and many things that are of Government too far. It is one thing to warn and hold accountable, but there should always be balance.

 

I look forward to being more informed on what this is about and where it will go.

[Walter Simtec Simmons]

I agree, and we the people must get as much documented material possible available so that all polls all bills are reflecting what we feel will be signed into law by the president those who are most vulnerable. 

Byard Pidgeon said:

Obama's "deficit plan" speech today was very good. He was saying the right things, and in the right context...and part of that context was unstated..."veto". Without saying it directly, he made it clear that he'll veto anything that he feels will hurt those who are most vulnerable.

It was somewhat inspiring, even though with every little lift of inspiration, I had to remember how many times what he's said is nothing like what he's done. Will this be a shining hour, or another dull disappointment?