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

[Lionel Kwame Lightbourne]

Stop trying to be so deep until you drown yourselves; most of you say so much to say so little. Solutions are of the soul and passion does not constitute policy. African Americans are tired of black leaders showing up to the negotiating table with plates. The pen is mightier than the steak knife…LOL…

[lisa swytzer]

freedom is better than anything do what you want when you want how you want

[One Iam]

Lets take the "black" thing out of it and just look at the national need.  If you have 200 billion dollars to spend on a stimulus program, why not apply at least 50 billion dollars to setting America's large cities and

metropolitan hubs right???  One billion dollars in Detroit city would work miracles for the entire metropolitan area, balance the city budget, improve the credit rating, provide jobs and business expansion, solve the abandoned housing situation, help to reduce the size of the school system and improve the quality of education.  It would reduce the misery index and bring down the crime rate.  Did all the money have to go to the bankers and corporations?  Why does a move by an American President to strengthen urban America for the good of America have to be seen as some kind of dirty "black agenda"?  The really crazy part is that black people support the neglect of urban America because they're there.  It's like they're saying because I'm here, I can understand the neglect(especially from a black man.  You know they're watching him).  That's bull!  They should be watching Obama doing the right thing and not the traditional white thing.
 
Wes Hall said:

I am totally against the attack of black people by black people. With that said, a pattern is becoming noticable. Many blacks are quick to get angry when a local black merchant doesn't provide them, "The hook-up," (a discount on the merchants merchandise). - That same person will go to the mall and never once think to ask the white merchant to discount his/her product. To me, this is the same thing happening in this scenario. Not once do the same people who so ferverently protest Obama's lack of promoting a black agenda, do so to his white counterparts. The reason, they will state, is Obama is a black man. This lack of insight is based on emotionalism, which takes away from the bigger picture. Here's the picture: Obama is a black man - running a country that is approximately 12% black (mostly comprised of individuals who will not support one another) - The brother has been fighting battles from the moment he landed in the white house. No other president has been strapped with the economic woes this president inherited and been expected to "Wave a magic wand" and make those woes go away. On top of that the amount of venom thrown his way, continuously, by racist whites, makes for him to have to constantly be aware of any material he might give them to start the next barrage of political attack. On top of all that, in order to be effective in creating change, a president must make it to a second term. It is during that second term he can effectuate the most change, because he doesn't have to worry about not repeating his term. (Of course, he will then have to worry about impeachment if he does anything to ruffle the feathers of those who oppose his actions and decisions.)

 

What really bothers me is the lack of foresight presented by those whom we call leaders. Maybe it is our fault (meaning those of us who call them leaders). Why is it some cannot see the strategy necessary to move a black agenda forward? You certainly can't/won't get there by alienating the very person who is in the best position to move that agenda forward. We will never get everything we want from "Any" one man - we must learn to support our man in power ... then again, by way of these continued attacks, maybe the man is worn out too. Woe be to us, if we don't begin to understand the ways of power and act accordingly.

One Iam said:

I totally agree with Dr. West's point of view.  It's not about Dr. West and Brother Smiley seeing Obama as an instrument of the black community in the white house and pushing for a biased black agenda from the oval office.  It's about Obama as the President, directing the resources of this nation toward it's pain and healing, wherever that may be.  Obama will not address the suffering in the black community at all, even though it's America's most brutal because he's playing to the old guard and romancing his white votes.  You can give Obama unconditional love but he does not deserve unconditional support.  Your support of Obama should be about the positive changes that he has made in this nation in general and your individual life in particular from the office of the President.  Bombing Africa didn't show me anything but more of the same. 

[lisa swytzer]

i never got anything by force i only force self body protection

[Penguin Board of Directors]

 

"I am totally against the attack of black people by black people" .......Wes Hall.

Hi Wes,

I am interested in understanding a little more about your above quote. I do not wish to go out on a limb and assume that I understand the rationale for what you are trying to say. Your statement is not circumscribed in any way, which has me wondering. Though unsolicited, I am willing to vouchsafe that you do not intend to issue a blank check in favor of a black person's position just because the person happens to be black or are you? 

 

Wes Hall said:

I am totally against the attack of black people by black people. With that said, a pattern is becoming noticable. Many blacks are quick to get angry when a local black merchant doesn't provide them, "The hook-up," (a discount on the merchants merchandise)....

One Iam said:

I totally agree with Dr. West's point of view.  It's not about Dr. West and Brother Smiley seeing Obama as an instrument of the black community in the white house and pushing for a biased black agenda from the oval office.  It's about Obama as the President, directing the resources of this nation toward it's pain and healing, wherever that may be....

[lisa swytzer]

you do not happen to be black

[lisa swytzer]

if you do not know how to control things ask a white man how he does it now you can talk to your good white folk

[lisa swytzer]

i must say i way white people get people buy from them is discount and sales  black people like to charge a price for three or four people put a good price on it you will get 10 people

[joe]

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.

[Penguin Board of Directors]

"you do not happen to be black"

 

Was that intended for some kind of rebuttal? If yes, my target audience understands the usage; it is a shade higher than the (familiarly) pedestrian.

[Mustafa Ansari]

So, it appears. Brother Sharpton has been awfully quiet, while on his new post.

Marvin Stanford said:

It is clear that brother Al Sharpton has been neutralized by The Administration, and The Administration is neutralized by the Banking interests.

[joe]

Say on, Yomi.. and I understand where your question was coming from. I would have extended the statement that there should be no violence of one human being, irrespective of ethnicity, on another.

Yomi Ace said:

"you do not happen to be black"

 

Was that intended for some kind of rebuttal? If yes, my target audience understands the usage; it is a shade higher than the (familiarly) pedestrian.