• Opening
  • Basics
  • Research
  • Writing
  • Teaching
  • Media
  • Scholarism
  • Audio/Video
  • Podcasts
  • Students?!
  • Archiving
  • Art
  • Analog (the anti-blog)
  • Other Blog Entries
  • Webpages
  • Glorious Failures
  • American Academy of Arts and Sciences Event
  • Art of Dom and Res Syllabi
  • domination and resistance recordings
  • Anti-Black Human Rights Violations
[Christian Davenport]

Black to the Future, Part 6: 1968 @ 2018, a 50 year Retrospective of the Republic of New Africa

3/31/2018

0 Comments

 
50 years ago today a group of African Americans declared themselves sovereign and established their government.  As stated in their ​Declaration of Independence:

We, the Black People in America, in consequence of arriving at a knowledge of ourselves
as a people with dignity, long deprived of that knowledge as a consequence of revolting
with every decimal of our collective and individual beings against the oppression that
for three hundred years has destroyed and broken and warped the bodies and minds
and spirits of our people in America, in consequence of our raging desire to be free of
this oppression, to destroy this oppression wherever it assaults mankind in the world,
and in consequence of our inextinquishable determination to go a different way, to
build a new and better society in a new and better world do hereby declare ourselves
forever free and independent of the jurisdiction of the United States of America and the
obligations which that country’s unilateral decision to make our ancestors and ourselves
paper-citizens placed upon us.

We claim no rights from the United States of America other than those rights belonging
to human beings anywhere in the world, and these include the right to damages,
reparations, due us for the grievous injuries sustained by our ancestors and ourselves
by reason of United States lawlessness.

Ours is a revolution against oppression – our own oppression and that of all people
in the world. And it is a revolution for a better life, a better station for mankind, a surer
harmony with the forces of life in the universe (Republic of New Africa 1968a).

Over the days of the founding convention, they had accomplished a great deal.  They decided on opening up the nation to all African Americans and not requiring some level of commitment/awareness beforehand.  They also structured the government in elaborate detail.  
Picture
As for the flavor of the event, it seemed quite joyous to hear Imari Obadele (one of the more important leaders of the movement as well as perhaps its leading theoretician) tell it.  As he states in an unpublished biography:

The convention was charged with excitement from beginning to end.  The excitement flowed from the issues and from the momentousness of black people finally taking upon themselves to create the government which, for so long, we had needed.  And it flowed, too, from the personalities – the mentally brilliant, serious nationalists who had gathered from all over the country, their humility and camaraderie, their sense of self-possession and assurance – indeed, their personal styles: Baba Oserjeman Adefunmi, with his strictly authentic formal Yoruban dress, beautiful long robes and beads, his wives, his entourage, his pomp and circumstance; the portly, goateed, dignified Obabos Alowo, business manager for a black Los Angeles tool shop, bring with him the wisdom of many years in the struggle, including 20 years as a black nationalist in the Communist Party, and many years matching wits with and winning against the white man; the strong yet softly beautiful, darkly lovely widow of Malcolm X, Betty, who would whisper to me that she wanted to hold an office in the new government; the indomitable Queen Mother Moore, of New York City and the freedom struggle all over America, 73-years-old, as active and alert and as full of a sense of humor as one half her age, a veritable institution of our struggle, who with her sister, Virginia Colins of New Orleans (who would become a Vice President of the Republic), and other women had worked for reparations at a moment when most of us could not spell the word, whose entire life is an example of personal commitment to, personal sacrifice for freedom for our people, and justice for individuals (many men once on death row, owe their reprieves to Queen Mother), and Henry “Poppa” Wells of Detroit, almost as old as Queen Mother, quite as clear in his mental processes, him too with the precious ability to laugh at himself, and at the world, a one-time Muslim who studied years ago under Mr. Farrard (mentor for Elijah Muhammed) but now a vocal and inveterate atheist who could not believe in a God who would permit the things which have happened to black people during the last 300 years, whose passionate speeches on the need for nationhood, made on the floor of the large, crowded Fellowship Hall, so endeared him to us all that, after naming Ray Willis Speaker of the National Council of Representatives (our legislature), we names Poppa Wells Vice Speaker.

On the evening of that first day, Saturday, we began the process of electing officers of the government.  We met in the modern, 500-seat Helen DeRoy Auditorium on Wayne State University Campus.  The Malcolm X Society had come prepared to work for election of certain persons to specific offices.  Brother Gaidi was our choice for first Vice President.  Betty Shabazz was our choice for Second Vice President, but we did not know, until after she had arrived at the Convention – indeed, until moments before the nominations began and she learned over and whispered to me – that she would accept.  Robert F. Williams was our choice for President.  In retrospect the idea of nominating and electing Robert should have been obvious: he was, after all, the foremost living black nationalist, from America, in the world. But the actual idea came from the brain of Brother Agbo (Charles Enoch), who, at one of the preparatory meetings of the preparatory meetings of the Malcolm X Society excitedly broached the idea, pointing out, among other things, that Robert was the only person with stature enough to unite all black nationalists in America, that he was, in addition, a tried revolutionary and a consistent black nationalist.   Robert’s international standing was also important, as was the fact of his residence in China.  There was no thought from that point on but that we should nominate Robert.


The day emerged with a government as well as its leadership.  These were quickly identified by the US government as depicted below:
Picture
And thus it began.  The Republic of New Africa was formed and with it hundreds of questions: 
  • who would join?
  • what would they do - specifically?
  • why would they choose the tactics that they did?
  • what would the US government do in response (following the rebellion/riot of 1967 and growing black militancy throughout the country)?
0 Comments

Black to the Future, Part 5: 1968 @ 2018, a 50 year Retrospective of the Republic of New Africa

3/30/2018

1 Comment

 
At the founding convention of the RNA 50 years ago, the delegates had a great deal on their minds.  There was much to do to create a nation but before getting there it is worthwhile to discuss their reasons for creating a black nation in the first place.  For this, we rely upon the RNA itself:
Picture
From this view, Blacks were never from here in the first place, they were never fully accepted as Americans, they needed jobs, they needed some control over their financial livelihoods beyond simply holding a job, they needed to stop being recruited/railroaded (because of the impoverishment just noted) from going around the world engaging in war against other oppressed people and they needed protection from US security forces (e.g., the national guard and regular police) because they were being treated poorly.

How should black folk resolve their problems?  Well, the way the RNA was thinking about it is provided below in a figure I created a while ago:
Picture
From the RNA perspective (figure 1), African Americans were an ethnic minority in the US - one that was treated poorly across a number of different dimensions (highlighted above).  The civil rights movement (figure 2) was interested in dissolving the differences between the ethnic minority and the dominant group, being led through non-violent civil disobedience.  In contrast (figure 3), the RNA sought to lead the African American minority out of the context of the dominant group.  Indeed, their ideal situation involved African Americans completely pulling themselves out of America.

​Before getting to this point, however, there was the question of who should be in the nation.  The RNA was clear on the problem as well as the solution but they were less clear on exactly who should be involved. During the founding convention, two opinions emerged: 1) all people of African descent should be included; and 2) only people of African descent who were conscious of the discriminatory situation as well as its resolution.  The choice made would be an important one.  If the first approach was taken, then all African Americans would be immediately included and this could be a potentially large as well as varied group. This would also facilitate infiltration from government agents.  If the second approach was taken, then a smaller/select group of African Americans would be included and this could make it a bit difficult to pursue some of the objectives under discussion.  At the same time, this approach limited the ease of infiltration.

​What would they choose???

1 Comment

Black to the Future, Part 4: 1968 @ 2018, a 50 year Retrospective of the Republic of New Africa

3/27/2018

0 Comments

 
50 years ago today, a couple of hundred black nationalists were about to convene in Detroit to discuss the creation of a black nation that would be carved out of the existing United States.  The group facilitating the meeting was called the Malcolm X Society.  The society had emerged from two prior organizations: the Group On Advanced Leadership (GOAL) and the Freedom Now Party. This group was fed up with civil rights and trying to work within the existing political apparatus.  GOAL tried to create innovative solutions to ideas and then use existing mechanisms (like lawsuits, petitions and protest) to achieve social change.  The Freedom Now Party attempted to get appropriately radicalized politicians elected.  Neither worked in remedying the problems identified: economic inequality in the form of wealth and land (not income), poor treatment by the police, unemployment,  underemployment and a certain emptiness that came from what was believed to be a heartless economic and political system.  

Set on a path to discover a way out of this situation, the individuals associated with the organizations above interacted with a newly liberated from the Nation of Islam Malcolm X (note that behind Malcolm in 
the picture below is an outline of the structure for GOAL). Evidently, Malcolm had attempted to radicalize the people associated with what would become GOAL but they were not quite ready.  Accordingly, Malcolm moved on to try and create other organizations and by the time the group came to see that Malcolm had a point, he was dead (assassinated).  Paying tribute to their mentor and acknowledging the missed opportunity they called their new group "The Malcolm X Society".  Taken from my book How Social Movements Die:

(The Society) was a small semi-underground organization composed of individuals in Detroit and a few other cities around the US (Obadele 1970: 152).

The approach advocated by this group was simple. As conceived, the Malcolmites would work within the governmental framework and state structure of the United States, winning black people, first in Mississippi (a place with a large number of African Americans), to the cause of independent land and power, follow(ing) this with election victories (the Sheriff’s offices, particularly) within the US federal system and, finally, take the black state out of the US federal union at the moment when white power could no longer be successfully resisted or neutralized in its efforts to prevent the creation of a new society in the black state (Obadele 1968, 1).

 
Picture
US political authorities were well aware of what was about to happen.  They had infiltrated GOAL and the Freedom Now Party with informants and agents provocateur.  They also appeared to be ready to infiltrate whatever the Malcolm X Society was about to pull together in a few days time.  The (then Confidential but later released) Detroit Police Department document below reveals that they knew what was going on: 
Picture
Picture
Plans were set.  Planes, trains, automobiles and busses were being used - more that latter two than the first.  And, lying in wait for all of them, were members of numerous policing institutions.  

Coming Next: Birthing a Nation

0 Comments

Black to the Future, Part 3: 1968 @ 2018, a 50 year Retrospective of the Republic of New Africa

3/22/2018

0 Comments

 
Picture
Fifty years ago, about two hundred black people were just about to go to Detroit for a black nationalism conference (starting on March 28th, 1968).  The objective of the conference was clear: they were going to start a black nation and try to secede from the United States.  The decision had been made following the first two conferences.  The reason?  Well, as America reflects on the most recent shooting in Sacramento of a young, African American male, it is clear that in many ways the reasons were about what you would expect.  

​There was police violence.  Consider the story below from February 1968 to get some sense of what they were dealing with (I apologize about the slight tilt in the image but this is what I have):
Picture
  • The problem of police violence against black people has been a long one for America.  
There were also the problems of economic inequality, poor housing, poor health and numerous other reasons.  

I wrote a book about the group that emerged from this conference in 2014/15 called How Social Movements Die: Repression and Demobilization of the Republic of New Africa.  The book told the story of the Republic of New Africa (or RNA) but that story was obscured a little by an interest that I had in exploring how repression influenced social movements.  This did not go over too well though as many people that study social movements don't normally think of black nationalist movements - preferring the civil rights movement as a topic of study.  There are also those who think that the topic of radical black social movements is only something that concerns black people and not the broader field of political science or, to a lesser extent, sociology (I'm going to explore this claim more rigorously by evaluating what examples are cited in published work).  Aware of this, I even had some conversation with the publisher about leaving the subtitle out of the American version of the manuscript just trying to get someone to engage with the content like with people who study media bias but don't consider my Media Bias book employing the case of the Black Panther Party.  The RNA book was also a bit odd because it was not quantitative enough for the rigorous crowd as I was doing this in a series of articles and it was not qualitative enough for the storytelling/narrative crowd because it actually made a reference to some theory and data. In fact, one of my book reviewers pushed me: 
  • Is the book really about demobilization? It is as much about emergence and trajectory.
  • Potentially forcing a theoretical framework and research question.
  • Perhaps tell “cradle to grave” story.
  • Provide inductive theory after story.
My response revealed my thinking at the time:
  • Comment a: I am most interested in demobilization and believe that the biggest deficiency in the literature exists here as well (acknowledged by both reviewers). The book ends when the organization known as the Republic of New Africa (RNA) ends. This said, I admit that the story of demobilization is intricately connected with discussions of emergence and trajectory (see comment/question 1) or, at least, they should be.  I think that this awareness is reflected in the title of the book (Mobilization, Repression and Demobilization) as well as the structure of the book (i.e., I begin with a discussion of pre-RNA organizations and then move to/through the RNA). Highlighting the nuances of emergence and trajectory arguments would increase the discussion of the literature, which is something that I would prefer not to do and something that I do not believe Cambridge would appreciate either as it might make the book longer as I moved through what the literature has said on this topic (admittedly much more than what exists on termination).
 
  • Action a: I will introduce some discussion of social movement organization emergence and trajectory while highlighting that I am most interested in demobilization. There is more discussion of these areas within the literature and thus I will assume that knowledge of them is somewhat well developed, allowing me to discuss them in less detail.
 
  • Comment b: I do not believe that I am “forcing” a theoretical framework.  The theory emerged from my reading of the available literature. Part of it also emerged from considering the material employed within the manuscript. The research question was not “forced” either.  I believe that there are a great many questions that could be asked regarding the case and data available within this study.  I am most interested in demobilization and this is the greatest weakness within the literature.
 
  • Action b: I believe that the reviewer is responding to a relatively conventional/standard view where theories and hypotheses are presented and models are then run to “test” the argument.  I can highlight the point (acknowledged by this reviewers; see comment/question 7) that the type of analysis provided within the book is frequently used to better understand causal mechanisms or generate new theory.  In so doing, however, it is important to have some idea of what mechanisms are believed to already be involved as well as where these come from and this leads back to the point that some discussion of theory before the analysis is crucial.
 
  • Comment c: I think that a “cradle to grave” theory is too ambitious and fear that the argument might come out as being too path dependent or (alternatively) too contingent.  This would tend to push my argument to be a bit more encompassing than I wish (pushing against Reviewer 2’s point to make less ambitious claims). Additionally, the literature tends to break down emergence, dynamics/trajectory and termination, thus compelling me to deviate a great deal from what exists. 
 
  • Action c: As conceived and written, my theory about how repression influences social movement organizations is essentially a “cradle to grave” story and I can make this clearer thereby meeting the reviewer’s expectations. I will do this however noting that my main interest lies with demobilization/termination. Indeed, I think that one of my biggest points is that our understanding of how/why social movement organizations demobilize involves understanding how/why they were created as well as how/why they sustain themselves.
 
  • Comment d: I do not wish to provide some inductive theory at the end the book (following the discussion/analysis of the data/case) for several reasons. First, I cannot think of any books where this was done satisfactorily and thus I cannot find a decent model. The one example I can come up with resulted in two different books (e.g., James Scott’s Weapons of the Weak led to Domination and the Art of Resistance). Second, I believe that most social science is not written in this way and that I will thus lose my audience. The format suggested is more in line with history and as I am not a historian, I do not feel comfortable writing in this format.  In addition to this, I feel that research concerning African Americans is frequently viewed as being unimportant for theory as well as work outside of this community and thus if the case was put up front, the theoretical as well as broader implications of the work would be missed/ignored.
 
  • Action d: None.

In retrospect, I was wrong.  I should have adopted the cradle to grave framing and acknowledged that the book was not just about demobilization (this is something that members of the group pushed me on as well reminding me that "we ain't dead brother").  Additionally, I could have left out the theory and ran with the story, which was something that was suggested to me years before.  Pushing me, I was asked: "why not just tell the story of the group?  Why go into all this theory of the state and repression stuff?  Why would African Americans take this action?  Why would anyone?  What did they do specifically?  When?  Where?  How?  I think people would be interested." Good questions.  In line with this perspective, I should have just told the story and been a little more historian (and/or sociologist) than political scientist.  In that spirit I'm going to now tell the story of the RNA more or less chronologically as it emerged on March 28, 1968 until the first cohort begins to leave the organization in 1972/3.  For this, I will draw upon the book a little (it is there after all) but, more importantly, I will draw upon the extensive archive of material that I have on the group including pictures, posters, flyers, coloring books, videos, biographies, recordings, RNA documents, informant reports, arrest records, government evaluations as well as my thoughts about the topic spanning my 20 year journey researching.  

Next week we go black to the future and move with the Republic of New Africa as they say enough, try to secede from the US and create a black nation.
0 Comments

    Analog - The Anti-Blog

    By "Analog" I am referring to the adjective (i.e., relating to or using signals or information represented by a continuously variable physical quantity such as spatial position or voltage) and not the noun (i.e., a person or thing seen as comparable to another) for I wished to give voice to my thoughts which have come to me in a more or less continuous manner but which do so in a way that is not consistent in content or form. Thus you will see short stories, brief thoughts, haikus, low-kus and even a political cartoon or two. 

    Winner of Best Blog Post for 2014 by International Studies Association

    Picture

    Archives

    May 2024
    April 2024
    November 2023
    December 2022
    October 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    May 2021
    April 2021
    January 2021
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    September 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    December 2014
    September 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013

    Categories

    All
    Activism
    Art
    Black Power/nationalism
    Communication
    Counter-terrorism
    Data
    Database
    Education
    Elitism
    Ethnicity
    Fashion
    Friends
    Genocide
    Global Blackness
    Hip Hop
    Human Rights Violation
    Identity
    India
    Inequality
    Memories
    Norway
    Passing
    Political Conflict
    Political Tourism
    Political Violence
    Poverty
    Racism
    Republic-of-new-africa
    Research
    Revolution
    Rwanda
    Sexism
    Social Media
    State Repression
    Struggle
    Terrorism
    Travel
    United States
    Untouchability

    RSS Feed

Picture