This DOWN FRONT! is somewhat of a departure from earlier issues. First of all, it’s late! Readers will be looking over these pages during February, a.k.a Black History Month. And secondly, it includes entries from another “collection” put together a couple of years ago. Finally, it is somewhat longer; but just as biased and informative. So, enjoy!
~
A KING FOR ALL SEASONS
“One should bear in mind that there is nothing more difficult to execute, nor more dubious of success, nor more dangerous to administer than to introduce a new order of things; for he who introduces it has all those who profit from the old order as his enemies, and he has only lukewarm allies in all those who might profit from the new. This lukewarmness partly stems . . . from the skepticism of men, who do not truly believe in new things unless they have actually had personal experience of them.”
Nicolo Machiavelli

~
Anyone who has taken the time over the years to read what I have written - to say nothing of actually remembering even some of it - will know how I have wavered in my view of Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. a.k.a. Dr. King. Well, it’s his American time again and I want not so much to revisit those views (though I’ll do so briefly) as I want to look at King in another context...one which is decidedly much more appreciative.

First, my earlier reservation about King came from my firm belief that firm and unbending commitment to non-violence was a premature and perhaps (more important) inappropriate stance in the light of abject racism. I can still generate some support for that position but right now I want to come at King from another direction. He was indeed a great man because he represented a special kind of Black man because he so bravely took that very stance. Seems strange but it is true all the same. In other words, that he could even talk and live that way (i.e., non-violently) against all obvious and subtle odds was indeed his “specialness.” One cannot help but admire that. I suspect that were he alive today he would be pretty much the same kind of person in that particular respect although I am confident he would of necessity be more of an inspiration than practitioner. Age and front line battles take their inevitable toll.

Ultimately King was a man of tremendous energy coupled with or better yet boosted by an unshakable religious faith. But what now truly stands out for me about the man was his prophetic witness. King was the consummate visionary. Check this out: He actually “saw” an America in which skin color took a distant back seat to “character content.” Now that is both wonderful and - looking at America for what this country truly is - impossible...at least I think so. But Martin Luther King was not the man whose confidence or (back to his future) vision was shaped by the harsh realities of the day. Rather he pushed his world view beyond the blinding smoke of the present and indeed saw a color-clear tomorrow devoid of the trappings which continue to plague this ever-struggling country.

When the rest of the country was chiming in to King’s talk about having a worthy dream, Malcolm X (who was easily my kind of Black man) remarked that in order to have a dream, one would have to be asleep. That was, of course, a not so subtle slap at King...who not so ironically, remained resolute.

So in 1998 Martin Luther King stands very separate and apart from ordinary men and women all over this country. Yet his life, and even his vision was rooted in that which daily confront Black people. It was just that he did something quite different with that same harsh reality. And that’s what gives me my present perhaps delayed appreciation for the man, this giant of a man. I just don’t know how in hell he did it...and I love him because he did.

~
CEREMONIES IN DARK YOUNG MEN (9-18-96)
It really isn't sexist to get a good "feel" for the plight of Black people in America by "simply" looking at a handful of well-known male personalities. By the way I find the word "sexist" to be a peculiar addition to the language. "Sexy" sounds better and is a lot easier to define. Here's who and what I have in mind.

TUPAC - His mother was a member of the Black Panthers and spent time in the joint (i.e., prison). He made it into the Big Time with music and acting. He was not outstanding in either venue; but he had charm, good timing, good connections within the entertainment industry, lots of money and fans. So he was an envied "streets to riches" all-American success story. He played both ends against his own middle. For whatever reason, somebody somewhere didn't like him. At age 25, Tupac Shakur was dramatically assassinated. The tragedy is not just the all too often sad tale of a young Black man "gone" before his time; rather that in all likelihood, it was another Black man who was responsible.

OJ - How many people (particularly in Los Angeles) feel that he has paid all the legal dues he needs to pay? The spinoff from his widely followed criminal trial found expression in many forms. One was a distinct racial division of opinion over his innocence or his guilt. Closer to accuracy, it (the split) was between Blacks and Jews. Seemingly it was laid to rest at least in the "article everyday" sense. With the opening of the civil trial, the scenario is revisited. It is not at all difficult to pick up the strains of "We're gonna nail him [i.e., his Black ass!] this time. If he is found guilty, the split will be revisited and even worse than before.

RICKY ROSS - Another in a string of a Black (his-very-own-people-exploiting) opportunist. Greedy, drug peddling dude. Paid his debt to society, but then turned his back on whatever lesson he was supposed to have learned and went back for seconds. In the sting operation, he got stung big time! Ricky got his desired seconds and the Law got Ricky. The implications of his hustling may possibly be broadened by the alleged participation of the CIA a la Contras Revisitation. But even if that were not the case, Ross was a peddler of living death, more attached to the obvious material rewards of drug-dealing than being concerned about the harm he was causing. He had role models, but they were just like him. We all pay for his misdirection and avarice.

MIKE TYSON - The undisputed butt-kicker of the Western world. A latter day Joe Louis in terms of talent and mental non-prowess. But much better managed from the financial standpoint by Don (Somebody-Electrocuted-Mah-Hair) King. Destined to keep out of trouble from now on...as much as he possibly can anyway. And will continue to terrorize anyone of whatever race, religion, ethnic persuasion or sexual preference who would dare to disregard common sense and enter the ring against this modern day lethal and legal monster.

LOUIS FARRAKAN - He dined with Khadafi which is his right. The US government said he could not accept Khadafi's largess which the government sees as its right. He predicted or perhaps called forth an earthquake for California which is his self-delusion. I will personalize this participant of the Black barometer and say he remains a giant for his role in putting together the historic Million Man March. He gets high marks for organizing, fund-raising and hackles-raising. He get the golden goose egg when it comes to accounting and accountability. [What happened, I wonder, to my meager ten dollars??]

TOM BRADLEY - We don't even know in what hospital this first Black mayor of Los Angeles he spent so much time. And...did we really care???

And so it goes. We shall one day overcome. I guess.
~
DRUGS, SELF-DETERMINATION AND BLACK FOLKS (9-29-96)
What I have noticed about my style of social commentary writing is that I do a lot of complaining (what else is new?) and I move along a plane of having a suitable/workable answer or solution to the subject at hand. The other pattern is to relate the topic to some larger principle. This makes sense to me because I believe the nature of the human condition does in fact tie into larger truths or principles. The political principle of Self Determination has always been a powerful and meaningful one for me. It gets at the very heart of so much that happens or doesn't happen in the Black Community.

The present focus on a CIA-Contras-Drugs in South Central Los Angeles is a case in point. But before addressing it I want to back up to a biting statement made in the movie, "The Godfather." Seeing so many movies and videos over the years keeps me from remembering all the particulars; but I have a hazy recollection of a couple of Mafia mobsters talking about dumping a large quantity of drugs somewhere. One of the enterprising thugs suggested Harlem because "the n---ers" [his reference, not mine] would, in effect, take anything. That wasn't the major theme or a necessary highlight of the film, but it made a lasting, biting impression on me.

So here we are these many years, these many "problems" later, holding meetings, press conferences, writing articles, etc. The allegation is that during the 1980's, the CIA, in an effort to raise money for the Contras of Nicaragua, "dumped" large quantities of illicit drugs in the cities of America...Los Angeles' Black neighborhood (a.k.a. South Central) being one of those places.

There are two basic positions: First, that the United States government, by way of CIA operatives was knowingly involved in illegal activity which had a grossly negative impact on the Black Community. I want to spend a little time on this point before moving to the next one. At this point there is no indisputable proof that such was the case. Such proof may, however, turn up during the course of the thorough investigation that is being demanded. I think it is not beyond the CIA to have been doing exactly that which is alleged. The CIA (make that the Intelligence Community in general) is known for all manner of activity up to and including murder of "unpopular" political personalities around the globe. Much of the agency's nefarious activity is unknown which is at one and the same time is shocking in extent and yet not surprising. That's what those folks are hired to do! If, as a side consideration, one Sadaam Hussein had been "done in" according to a meticulously orchestrated plot, the CIA's involvement would have been proudly touted by most Iraq/Hussein-hating Americans.

In the case under consideration here, if the agency did indeed do what is alleged one could hardly expect some brave soul to come forth smiling with an admission. That would not be "intelligent" behavior in the context of that same community. The CIA is the classic CYA organization. (The Los Angeles Police and Sheriffs Departments by the way operate by the same code.)

But here is the other item that interests me from a "community" perspective: That Black people don't produce drugs, don't have the boats or planes that could import such large quantities. The logic goes on to assert that being without such necessary resources, they (the drugs) had to come from outside. The sad economic commentary here is that with the collective wealth we regularly boast about we don't have a LOT of "things" we ought to have: e.g., a major Black-owned hotel right here in Los Angeles. In other words, it's kind of weird to boast(?) about being resource poor in this or any regard.

And in a related vein there is this: I would guess that more Black people die from the effects of drinking and smoking than from drug overdoseage. And yet Black people don't produce alcohol or manufacture cigarettes. So, in a word, what else is new? We have ALWAYS imported the ways and means of everything from survival to luxury items. We are indeed the consuming dumping ground for good and ill alike. And unless or until we come to sho nuff grips with what it means to be self-determining, all the present (justified) noise will be little more that practice for the complaints we will lodge in the next century...just 4 years hence.

~
IT TAKES A VILLAGE TO RAISE A VILLAGE IDIOT
Sometimes when I think about it, I just give myself a swift kick; and it doesn't take a lot of imagination to guess exactly where that kick is placed. There is a specific idiot I have in mind here and a general one.

Ward Connerly is a Village Idiot. I would say Asshole, but "idiot" will suffice here. He (successfully, I might say) picked up the anti-Affirmative Action banner, waved it high and into the fray of disillusioned, confused, frustrated, angry Californians who were convinced that AA was the enemy. Connerly's mentality was the real enemy; but it's too late to make that particular point now. Proposition 209 passed and did so decisively. At an earlier time I would have gone the tedious analytical route in an attempt to ferret what went wrong with a (Black??) man such as he. Where he got off track, or if he was ever on it to begin with? What about his parents? choice of movies of books? favorite leisure time activity? girl friends or male playmates? dating partners? Now I simply say none of it matters or maybe all of it did.

Even in the absence of that battery of answers I can simply say with confidence that I know an idiot when I spot an idiot and he is nothing less than that. The only thing I do indeed wonder about is this: Was he always so stupid?

Then there is the generalized madness that is plaguing young Black men...the most ridiculous form of exhibitionism seen in quite some time. Before pinpointing it let me say that mere exhibitionism is neither new nor, on it's face, worthy of note. But every now and then somebody hits the jackpot and the rest of the hopefully sane world is let with no choice but to take note. So, (some) young Black men: Pull your pants up; and (some) older Black men: Zip your mouth up!
~
THE JOKE IS ON WHO? (10-31-96)
Shaq likes Superman, Mike likes Rabbits, and just about nobody likes us but us. I saw something on the sports page of the 10-29-96 LA Times which didn’t especially surprise me but angered me all the same. There was a large photo of new Laker Shaquille O'Neal (or is it O’Neil?) and the reference to his personal likes..in this case, Superman. Something else equally mundane was noted, but I forgot what it was and the paper has been gladly discarded so I cannot go back and check it out. Getting relatively bent outa shape was really all my fault since I usually don’t read the sports page anyway...except when UConn is playing. So, like what's the big deal? Who cares?

Well, I am beginning to think that the real enemy is not any person, but something more elusive, much bigger than "the person" whomever he or she might happen to be. The crazy culprit is Popular Culture...a.k.a. "pop culture." It is fast, furious, undeniably appealing and ever-changing. Now you see it, now you hardly remember having seen it at all. It works that fast and that $ucce$$fully!!

Its rapidity, however, is less bothersome/dangerous than its impact. When we give even casual consideration to the fate of Black men specifically and Black people generally in the grasp of the monster called media, we shake our heads, scream or do both. Enough of that, let's be specific.

O'Neil is big, strong, talented and quick on his HUGE feet. The one side of the equation is that he is the awesome and decidedly threatening Black brute...paused to ravish white women and intimidate (at the low end) or outright kill (at the high end) white men. As a bona fide human being none of that may even approximate the real deal Shaq. But Black reality is hardly ever the story. The other side serves a wide range of sick and prevailing fantasies.
In a different way, something similar might be said about all that Michael Jordan stands for. Smaller, but undeniably talented. More inclined to complete an intelligent statement. Personable and with universal/planetary concurrence, talented. He can't play baseball and he doesn't set any golf links record that would give Tiger Woods reason to be concerned; but he raises havoc on the b'ball court.

Now what? Simply this: America has a way of doing a number with gifted Black men. The problem for America is that they (Black men) cannot be contained/restrained in their areas of specialty, their God-given talents. Be serious now. Has anyone ever been able to consistently "check" Jordan or the man from Orlando? So they must be parlayed into another kind of arena. An environment which someone else can either manipulate or control. And make no mistake about it: control is a kissing cousin to power. Power, of course, comes first. Don't take my humble bias for it. Think about it. Ponder the Predicament. What do you do with an elephant whose size and/or strength and/or talent and/or speed challenges every believable or acceptable dimension hitherto perpetrated? You either totally isolate him (a la Ali after his declared opposition to the Viet Nam War) or you methodically and lovingly reduce him to a cuddly nothing! You make him the real or symbolic "property" of Disney World. You Barbie-ize him. Have you ever seen or heard a Disney creation [that's the operative word] you didn't either want to have or hold or simply love?

So...as big as Shaq really is, he loves something/someone bigger (and stronger) than himself...Superman. White makes right. Ironically, Shaq is much bigger than Superman ever was or (presumably) will be. But, let's say it honestly, Superman comes in another hue. And the LA Times and just about everybody else love it to the hilt! Why, he's not so intimidating after all. Then (likewise regarding Shaq) there was the movie with him serving as a genie to a child who, most certainly coincidentally, could have been the son of Superman. Yeah, I know it reeks of racial bias but, let's again face it, a little white boy controls a (watch out!) BIG Black man. But, like I say, it was a pure cinematic coincidence. Yeah...right!

And Michael, perhaps with more panache but equally ridiculous, fooling around with silly rabbits. Alice (in Lewis Carroll's classic "...Wonderland") uses the expression, "Silly rabbit." Alice was right. Rabbits are frisky, sexually redundant and anything but serious except at Easter time. But all that is just like Hollywood and who really cares? Sure, I could leave it all alone and be just as frivolous about it as (seemingly) everyone else, but - I regularly ask myself - why should I? My answer is, you guessed it: write about it!

Will it ever change? Probably not. Should it? Of course. Is there a dilemma here? I should say so. Does the survival of Black people depend on this continuing phenomenon? Thankfully not. Are we any closer to responding to Rodney King's dizzy inquiry, "Can't we get along?" Sure. As long as we save up enough money to sit and watch our heroic giants on the Giant Screen. Or the little screen which prepares us for “Film at 11.” I remain convinced that it is better for us to realize what is going on than to simply [as Magic Johnson puts it during his now tired clip before all movies at his complex] "stuff our face with popcorn" and deceive our gluttonous selves.

#