Can we find a way to stop the police from killing black people? The question is a simple and powerful one. As an African American male, it is also one that I have been waiting to hear for most of my life. While overjoyed to have people from all parts of the nation as well as the world calling for this, at the same time I am a little disappointed at the limited nature of the ask. Limited you say? Yes, limited. I think that trying to find a way to stop the police from killing black people is analogous to what is often referred to as “negative peace” (i.e., when violence has stopped). In my book with Erik Melander and Pat Regan called the Peace Continuum, we noted that most scholarship on political conflict and violence maintained a focus on this form of peace and it has thus been “conflict-centric”. This is clearly understandable as life is something to be treasured and sustained. Following from this, we see discussions of training, demilitarizing, defunding, prosecuting, socializing and essentially scaring the police in an effort to reduce their violence.
0 Comments
 In the current episode of protest and uprising folks are starting to look for answers about what could be done about police violence in particular and the police in general. What is largely absent from these conversations is the radical flank of American society – i.e., those activists from organizations that are either no longer here or that have been significantly hindered by anti-radical movement efforts over the past 100 years. I will attempt to highlight a few of them over the next few weeks but I will begin with a group called the Republic of New Africa (RNA) which I discussed in my book “Why Social Movements Die”. When I was writing about the book about the group many people were unclear about why I was doing this. The book on the Black Panther Party before that made sense to them because people had heard of it but who was the RNA? Why turn to them? I want to revisit the RNA in the current moment because what they highlighted as problematic is extremely important for framing discussions moving forward. The RNA emerged out of a civil rights group that tried to fit in/integrate called GOAL – The Group on Advanced Leadership in the early 1960s. What the group wanted to do was fairly straightforward. They wanted to get a decent foothold in the existing political-economy through a variety of strategies that addressed they felt were holding them back:
If these four ideas/policies were addressed, the group felt that blacks would have a chance in America. Note the attention given to the police and the specific policies noted there. Also note the call to have blacks learn to shoot under the label of justice. The efforts of this group led many to push further in the domain of electoral politics. The group concluded that what hindered black Americans was the limitation of the two-party system. What was needed they concluded was independent political action where African Americans could move between parties in accordance to whoever was providing the better policies for black folk. This led several members to assist Republican George Romney in his bid for Governor in 1962. The outcome was not really what they had in mind. Romney won but it did not lead to any benefits for black folks in general or even the ones that helped get him elected.  During this time the group came to be advised by Malcolm X - newly freed from the Nation of Islam and someone who's name has not really been mentioned in 2020 This Malcolm was broadly interested in challenging the political system, confronting the political, economic and cultural assaults that black people were subject to and bringing the widest possible number of black folk together. The idea was to create and wield power in a way that would alleviate stressors and violence from black life. As one of the members of the group stated,
by Malcolm’s speech in November of that memorable year (1963). . . we knew, through struggle, of the immensity of the work that faced the black man in America if we were to be truly free. Through struggle we knew of our own limited resources and the great skill and care that would be required were we to support our revolution from these resources – and we were obliged to, unless we wished to be bought and owned by the enemy. We knew, through struggle, of the great pressures that operate upon the black man to make him doubt the need for revolution, to slow down and seek his liberation through a personal acquisition of gadgets and wealth . . . And we knew, finally, through struggle, that we needed something more than the hopelessly too-small-always first aid, the pit-of-the-stomach-empty reforms, of a civil rights organization like GOAL. We needed power. Malcolm told us how – through setting up our own nation: that was our only real hope. As I state in my book, Malcolm X was very clear on what blacks needed. He thought that they needed a nation of their own as this was the only way to guarantee that they would he heard and that the weapons of the state would not be turned against them. In addition to this, he went on to say that (T)hey needed some friends and allies (preferably outside of the United States) as well as a new “interpretation” of the civil rights “thing.” As he pointed out, civil rights are domestic issues, which are dealt with or not dealt with within the United States. Human rights, however, are international issues, which are dealt with within the international realm. This is crucial, for he argues that “when you take your case to Washington, D.C., you’re taking it to the criminal who’s responsible; its like running from the wolf to the fox. They’re all in cahoots together. They all work political chicanery and make you look like a chump before the eyes of the world” (X 1964). Malcolm X went on to speak about guerilla warfare and the fact that this is perhaps the most effective way to counter a superior military power. He also identified that black nationalism (defined as African Americans controlling the politics and politicians, the economics and economic units of production, as well as the values within the black community) was already practiced by many within the Christian church, the NAACP, CORE, the SNCC, by Muslims, atheists, and agnostics. They just didn’t call it that (and this was something noted by those who had been in GOAL earlier). In a dramatic change from his previous incarnation that suggested everyone join the NOI, Malcolm X argued that if an organization was practicing black nationalism, it should be joined. It didn’t matter which one; all paths led to empowerment. While intrigued by these ideas, the group was not quite ready to give up on electoral politics. A second strategy concerned developing an independent party that could more directly and aggressively pursue the things that the black community needed. This led them to form the Michigan chapter of the Freedom Now Party. The idea was to break free from the shackles of two-party domination and advocate for African Americans. Unfortunately, this group could not unseat the existing parties and the bids for political office generally ended up with massive defeats. While trying to figure out what to do next, Malcolm X was murdered and shortly after this many black people in Detroit engaged in what is alternatively characterized as a rebellion or riot in 1967 following an questionable police raid and subsequent aggressiveness as well as violence. In this context, the group reimagined itself first as the “Malcolm X Society” (i.e., the Children of Malcolm) and then as the Republic of New Africa (RNA). The new group was interested in four things:
Now, I do not want to spend the time and space here to talk about why the RNA chose all of the objectives that they did for that is done in the book and the RNA does this quite well themselves. Rather, here I would like to talk about why the group thought that it needed a government and ponder how this is relevant to the current discussion about what to do with police violence and the police. As many know, nation-states are in part defined by the coercive/force-wielding capacity of central authorities. If one wanted to stop being treated violently by these actors therefore then assuming control over the agents of coercion and force would be a logical solution. This is what the RNA offered. Given the fact that winning elections was perceived to be difficult to do and that even with victory control over the use of coercion and force might be limited in addition to always being beholden to those with previously generated economic wealth, continuing under US jurisdiction did not seem to be a viable option. In addition to this, the idea was to remove the Malcolmites and the other black nationalist revolutionaries in America from a position where the United States might with impunity destroy them to a position where attacks upon us by the United States become international matters, threatening world peace, and thereby within reach of the United Nations, thereby within reach of our friends in Africa and Asia who would help us. We could not entertain hope of help in our struggle from international sources so long as we conducted our struggle within the United States federal union and as if we were citizens of the United States . . . The Republic was brought about, when it was, to frustrate hostile action of the United States against the seekers of land and power for blacks on this continent, and to create proper safeguards for ultimate success. (Obadele 1968, 3) Consider the important differences here from the current moment and discussion.
No one now seems to be making the case that African Americans have a separate identity from other Americans and thus everything is being framed as granting rights to African Americans as every other American (theoretically).
Presently, people around the world are protesting but this seems to be where things end. No one is talking about doing anything else discussed like in the R2P - Right to Protect, which calls upon other nations to intervene if violence is being enacted against the citizens of another nation seemingly beyond the control of the government in question. This is in part because the civil as opposed to human rights framing has been adopted.
This is a very different framing from the extension of democratic citizenship frame that is currently under development but what if there is something worth noting here? What if political and economic empowerment facilitates democratic citizenship? If this is the case, then discussions of wealth gaps, reparations, land theft discussed in Pigford v. Glickman and the place of African Americans in the US and global economy are all worthy of discussion. At the moment, this is not well being addressed. I offer the RNA here as but one slice into what needs to become a fuller discussion of all interpretations and solutions put forward earlier. US history is filled with such proposals. Now is the time to dust them off and bring them forward.  There are a great many people now interested as well as talking about what is going on throughout America right now regarding the protests and policing in response to them. Frankly, much of this discussion isn’t useful. Folks have opinions but individuals have been studying the relevant phenomenon systematically since the 1930s and we can find theoretical musings about them going back much further. Unfortunately, these people are not being picked to speak. Rather than looking at the members of the Peace Science Society (International), where I happened to be President at the moment, or one of the premier conflict journals (e.g., the Journal of Peace Research, the Journal of Conflict Resolution, Mobilization and Conflict Management and Peace Science) or even one of the general journals that occasionally includes something relevant to protest and protest policing/repression (e.g., the American Political Science Review or the American Sociological Review), it seems that the media is looking for people at the top 5-10 ranked Universities and asking them what’s up. A more thorough individual will pull up someone that wrote a book with a nice title or someone that has recently been in the news. Regardless, most of the people that study this stuff all the time are not getting any light and our collective conversation is suffering because of it.
Déjà vu. I feel like I did after 9/11. Folks just started being asked to talk about things and instead of passing interested parties to the dozen or so people who had been studying this topic, they decided to speak. The outcome: this does not lead to the best of what we have to offer. It’s not all that informative as it is largely the product of Academic Accidental Tourists – those who decide to stray from what they have been trained to do as well as what they have done and to take up the topic of contentious politics/conflict processes as an “expert”. While problematic, this does have the benefit of being entertaining and occasionally quite popular. So, what have folks gotten wrong? How should we think about what is going on based on actual scholarship? What if the right people were doing the talking – what would be highlighted? Before we do that, let’s start with the actors a little. Most students of contentious politics/conflict processes (i.e., genocide, civil war, human rights violation/state repression, [counter] terrorism, [counter] revolution, [counter] protest or protest policing and everyday resistance) would highlight four groups that are involved: 1) politicians (as the leaders of relevant political institutions that set policy/practices), 2) police (as the coercive/forceful agents of the state), 3) people (ordinary citizens who will choose to support politicians/the police, protestors or neither as well as 4) protestors (those who explicitly decide to challenge political authorities with some activity outside institutionalized mechanisms). No, who and what you start with varies but the differences are important. Sequences are always important, part 1. We currently have mass protests going on because of activities undertaken by the police directed against specific individuals in specific communities. In short, politicians and police started the contentious interaction. Politicians created the relevant coercive/forceful state institutions. They gave them directions/mandates, cash, training and a license to kill (in their name). It is worthwhile to acknowledge this because many are calling upon these same actors to fix the problem of state-sponsored violence via reforms. But, if these actors started the sequence of activities that led us to our current situation, then we may need to take politicians and police out of the loop – call it a conflict of interest. At a minimum, it may be necessary to bring in a third party to negotiate/facilitate change. Of course, saying this impugns US state sovereignty but frankly so does the violent action that they took/allowed against those under their care. Police violence undermines any respect or legitimacy that the government might have had. This discussion is largely missing in the things that we are currently reading. Sequences are always important, part 2. Research is fairly clear on the fact that protest leads to repression but what is not as commonly referenced is that it leads to different types/dimensions of repression – overt and covert, indiscriminate/selective/ collective, reactive/proactive and civil liberties restriction/personal integrity violations. Interestingly, and in contrast to the uniform relationship identified above, repression leads to every type of influence of protest: e.g., increases, decreases, delayed influences and no impact at all. What this means is that it is going to be a little difficult to figure out what is going to happen next because of the variation identified above. This does not mean that we have no clue, only that tracking and understanding dynamic interactions will be crucial. Democracy itself hangs in the balance. Now, to be clear, I do not feel that it is just black and increasingly white, Latino, Asian and other lives that are at stake. It is the very democracy itself. Perhaps Ralph Bunche said it best in The Political Status of the Negro in the Age of FDR:
As he continues,
Either the problem gets fixed or the United States is not a democracy. Some have gone this route with discussions of comparative authoritarianism but it merits stating this simple proposition as it is not often seen in the current conversation – at least in mainstream venues. I’m sure Bob Avakian has mentioned this 20 times already. Actors are not Unitary. Researchers know this but current discussion seems to have this point confused. All individuals out in the street when a protest is taking place are not down with the program. Some are there for justice. Some are there for Justine and/or Jeff – personal connections are incredibly important for understanding contentious events. Some are there for Sony or Gucci. And protests which are organized by some institution for a particular as well as clearly articulated objective are not the same as uprisings/disturbances/riots which are not developed/controlled by institutions and which are not associated with particular as well as clearly articulated objectives. The looting in the media focus exemplifies this confusion. Articles make it seem that at one turn an individual is out objecting to illegitimate state-sponsored violence, some window breaks and then this same individual decides to go for a laptop. Folks then bemoan the tactical choice of “the movement” but this is not movement activity soooooooo. Holding protestors accountable for those looting is not reasonable. From the work of Clark McPhail it is not even close to being reasonable. McPhail finds incredible variation within the same protest event. There is no clear connection or chain of command like in a military or police unit. Now, in these setting it would be reasonable to hold everyone accountable for what is done because of how they are organized. All is not always what it seems. Researchers of contentious politics would warn observers that just because someone looks like a protestor does not mean that they are one (see Gary Marx’s work). There are informants (those who would provide intel) and agents provocateur (those who purportedly instigate and escalate something in order to facilitate legitimate/legitimized state action) out there. This generally does not go the other way: there are few movement people embedded within police units to start something. Watch but always wonder. Beware of the Channel. Finally, much of what we see being discussed is on the coercion/force end of contentious politics but there are other strategies that are relevant – channeling (see James Scott and Jennifer Earl for this one). Here, we would see an effort to bring protestors under control by placating them – making them feel heard, empowered and involved but without having any real impact on anything. One could see this in current calls for leadership, questions about organizations being created and highlighting the newest voice of the generation. Two things on this: 1) if there is no leader/messiah/organization, then there is no one to coopt; and 2) if there is no specific person/organization, then politicians and police might actually have to speak to all individuals and/or, more realistically, assess the condition that prompted everyone to rise up in the first place (i.e., politicians and police). Luckily, I see that some contentious politics folks are finally getting tapped by decent venues: e.g., Cathy Schneider and David Meyer in The Washington Post today (which requires setting up an account which just feels wrong somehow so I don't have links to them). More folks out there. All hands on deck.  David Armstrong, Thomas Zeitzoff and myself once wrote a paper about how different people perceived the severity of different tactics that could be selected by protestors and police. In this work, we used a survey to identify what were perceived to be proportionate tactics as well as those which were perceived to be disproportionate. The idea was that those which were believed to be comparable in terms of their degree of lethality/severity would not raise much of an eyebrow but those where either the police or protestors used behavior that was deemed to be non-comparable/disproportionate would piss people off - prompting perceptions of illegitimacy on behalf of the disproportionate actor and a willingness to support the actor viewed as being poorly treated.  Marching in the streets being met with pepper spray and tear gas is clearly in the zone of disproportionate response. Looking at the current wave of protests and protest-policing moving across the US we can see all types of combinations of protestor and police action. I provide the chart above to help you better understand what choices are being made by the actors involved as well as how different combinations of protestor and police tactical choices will likely influence subsequent attitudes as well as behavior.
Now, one of the more interesting findings of this paper was that blacks and whites did not perceive the same tactics as being equally lethal/severe. In fact, whites were more willing to give police a pass viewing certain tactics as being less problematic whereas blacks were more willing to give protestors a pass viewing certain tactics as being less problematic. Essentially, this means that what we see taking place out in the streets will not generally be viewed in similar manners across distinct audiences and that our perceptions will likely lead to distinct actions in the aftermath of relevant activities. It's not all bleak however. What is interesting here is that it may be the case that when especially disproportionate activities are undertaken, we might see a convergence of opinion and in these moments we might actually find people coming together. The latter insight was beyond the study mentioned but it definitely seems possible thus providing a little possibility of peaceful engagement amidst the dark cloud of future contention. Black to the Future, Part 15: 1969 @ 2019, a 50 year Retrospective of the Republic of New Africa5/10/2019  Series Intro Almost four years ago, my book about the Republic of New Africa (RNA) came out entitled "How Social Movements Die: Repression and Demobilization of the Republic of New Africa. In the book, I attempted to strike a balance between theory and social science versus simply telling the story of the RNA. Unfortunately, I had to leave a lot of information out of the book and some of the details that were otherwise fascinating were eliminated. In this series, I revisit the archive and present the material 50 years later. Apologies for not being able to continue this piece for a while but life interfered. Enjoy. I will try to work my way backwards from this event as well as forwards. Following the New Bethel IncidentFor several decades researchers (including myself) having been documenting, theorizing and examining the impact of state repression on subsequent mobilization. The findings have been stably mixed. Researchers have found that arrests, detention and killing sponsored by political authorities have provoked fear as well as anger, leading to both lesser and greater amounts of protest. Some work finds no impact at all. Looking for an explanation for the variation? Don't look at the literature. It cannot really help you.
Exploring this topic two years ago, Christopher Sullivan and myself finished an article (entitled "The Rebel Alliance Strikes Back: Understanding the Politics of Backlash Mobilization") where we employed data obtained from the shooting, mass arrest and interrogation of the Republic of New Africa by Detroit Police Department. I discussed this event in earlier blog posts (here as well as here) and of course my book How Social Movements Die. In this piece, we discovered that existing research had potentially been missing something because of its generally high level of aggregation to the nation-state as well as across groups. By focusing on individual and group-specific dynamics, we identify that there were two distinct impacts of state repression on movement behavior (e.g., meetings and protests) as well as participation (i.e., showing up at meetings and RNA activities). At the group level, mobilization increased. Committing the raid, arrest and interrogation is estimated to have increased RNA events by 6 events in the week following after NBI took place. The long-term effects of New Bethel are estimated to have increased contentious activity by 8 events. At the individual level, mobilization was increased as well as decreased. Regarding the former, those in the RNA who were attending the meeting and shot at/arrested/interrogated not only stayed but ramped up their attendance as well as participation. Regarding the latter, those in the RNA who were not in attendance at New Bethel stopped showing up to events and meetings. In addition to this, there was a third group (i.e., those who were not in the RNA before the New Bethel Incident but who joined afterward). This number grows for a bit after New Bethel. So the mixed findings going back three decades might have actually been accurate. The key to understanding which way mobilization will go involves getting into the target group and following specifically who is in the group. This is the way to go. Black to the Future, Part 14: 1969 @ 2019, a 50 year Retrospective of the Republic of New Africa4/14/2019  Series Intro Almost four years ago, my book about the Republic of New Africa (RNA) came out entitled "How Social Movements Die: Repression and Demobilization of the Republic of New Africa. In the book, I attempted to strike a balance between theory and social science versus simply telling the story of the RNA. Unfortunately, I had to leave a lot of information out of the book and some of the details that were otherwise fascinating were eliminated. In this series, I revisit the archive and present the material 50 years later. Apologies for not being able to continue this piece for a while but life interfered. Enjoy. I will try to work my way backwards from this event as well as forwards. “A is for Africa”: Social Movements and Framing Resistance in the Republic of New AfricaI am often asked about providing more insights into who the RNA was and why they thought about what they did. Within today's blog I wanted to step back from the chronological account to delve into this a little bit. To do this, I examine a children’s picture book created by a black nationalist organization. In particular, the blog attempts to identify how this movement tried to frame the black struggle as well as mobilize a population to action on the heels of unprecedented legal and political victories as well as one of the most successful framing efforts in history (i.e., that of the civil rights movement). Conducting a detailed analysis of the images and words used within the group’s children’s book (The New Afrikan A, B, C’s), the blog explores the problems identified, solutions offered, constituency addressed as well as tensions contained within the message. As found, while the moment was ripe for black power, the lack of clarity as to exactly what should be done led to an incomplete and unconvincing message. Core Framing TasksAt its root social movement framing involves three distinct components (e.g., Benford and Snow 2000). First, there is the part that concerns identifying the problem or grievance – the “diagnostic phase” or “locating blame” in Snow’s language. This deals with identifying what is wrong and what is the issue that is causing so much trouble (e.g., a lack of food, the physical abuse suffered by the police, having no say in local schools and exploitation during work). Under this component, one also finds the identification of a specific community/ constituency: the we, the aggrieved of the claim. Second, there is the part that concerns identifying the solution – the “prognostic phase” or “suggesting action” in Snow’s language. This deals with what is to be done in order to address the problem(s) confronting the community of interest: protest, since, marches, petitions, book clubs, pamphleting, terrorism or revolution. The third part concerns precisely who should be involved with providing the resolution to the problem at hand. This deals with identifying the social movement organization that is or will take action on behalf of the aggrieved, who should be sympathetic to this movement, why people should believe in their abilities as well as why they should join. The RNAThe Republic of New Africa itself was as fascinating as it was puzzling. Similar to other black nationalists social movements at the time the RNA advocated celebrating African and African American cultures as well as privileging black businesses over others but differing from these organizations they also advocated seceding from the US and establishing a new nation-state in the United States. No clearer statement of their objectives exists than their “Declaration of Independence” (Republic of New Afrika 1968a). By any measure, it was an ambitious statement, broadly summarizing the experiences and aspirations of those engaged in struggle throughout the US. It begins immediately distinguishing itself from the US Declaration of Independence.
The core of the effort proposed was a somewhat radical reflection on the Duboisian paradox of African-American double-consciousness. The RNA simply suggested that blacks consider the long historical treatment at the hand of whites, since they were in the country in general as well as since they started to try changing their situation through the civil rights movement in particular. And, viewing this history, the Republic asked them to choose: stay in the US or leave and start the Republic of New Afrika. From the RNA’s perspective, the answer was clear: from the way blacks were treated, whites did not want them in the US. They never had and they never would. In response, they suggested that African-Amerikans should leave and make a better world. By adopting this position, many viewed the RNA as idealists, utopians or distopians – depending upon ones view of the imagined community that would result (a version of afro-socialism). But in certain respects, the RNA was probably one of the more realistic of the many groups that emerged during the period. The RNA’s realism was found in their sober analysis of the situation which emerged from viewing American society not as it should or could be but as they believed it was – segregated, unequal and at times quite violent. This was a hard message to take for African Americans because it compelled a particular understanding and led to a particular solution. The harshness was slightly muted however by their reminding blacks that in many respects, they were already in the Republic. As they stated in their publication “Now We Have a Nation” (Republic of New Africa 1968b: 4):
In a sense, the RNA suggested that blacks simply take a small but necessary step to complete what racism and hatred had already began: create a nation and secede from the US. How did they go about doing this? I address this below. The New Afrikan A, B, C’s  Of all the types of venues for distributing the message above, why would the Republic of New Afrika create a children’s picture book? Well, frankly the RNA confronted a major marketing problem and they needed to reach as many individuals as possible. As a result, they tended to have a little bit of everything: e.g., a newsletter, discussion groups, mass demonstrations, flyers, posters as well as adult books of both fiction and non-fiction. A children’s book was perfect to add into the mix. It was straightforward in its language. Within it one was allowed to use both text (limited as it was because of the age-group) as well as visualization which was extremely important for the overall message. Indeed, the black nationalist movement was in many respects intricately connected with the black culturalist movement and its various images of black pride (Rhodes 2007): afros, fists, dashikis, drums and various symbols from Africa. These called out for visualization. Additionally, children’s books are very much family affairs involving the ritual of members coming together in the solitude of their own homes in order to read to one another, explore and perhaps even set the seeds of new worlds. If that sacred space could be penetrated, then the RNA could work on building African-American consciousness from the inside out. They thus created their book. The children’s book was found in the archive given to me. Prior to that time, I had not heard of or read about anything like it. Additionally, in my numerous interviews of activists at the time, no one ever mentioned such a thing. Diagnosis. As conceived, the essence of any social movement diagnosis is detail – laying out the injustice (e.g., Benford and Hunt 1992). The movement must make it clear who did what to whom, why, when and how. At the same time, the social movement organization identifying the problem to be rallied around and mobilized against (i.e., problem identification and the locus of attribution) cannot seemingly overwhelm the recipient of this message with too much detail so as to make it appear that the problem is insurmountable. There is thus a delicate balance that must be maintained. The RNA was clearly aware of this balance as they begin their book with “A is for Africa, from which our ancestors came” (Figure 1 shown above). The image is a bold mélange with the top showing four Africans with their arms behind their backs and one white person – a slaver (with rifle under arm), marching them forward to some destination. All stand in front of a ship, which, from the angle, appears to be docked behind them. Immediately below this and taking up the majority of the page are depictions from Africa. Here, there are pharaoh looking individuals at the top – a male as well as a female, likely signifying nobility (literally overlaying the Nile valley where this civilization existed), pyramids lay over East Africa likely signifying intelligence, there is couple to the west looking past one another but in clearly observable African garb (i.e., large earrings and perhaps a series of neck rings) and there are more traditional looking Africans with spears, some sort of hats and bare-breasted. Below Africa to the left, the slave ship is off-shore, communicating that they have left the continent or are about to. A smaller ship, a white sailor and some Africans appear to stand on the beach. It is not exactly clear what they are doing but the ship sitting ominously in the background as well as knowledge about what transpired provides the meaning. Below Africa to the left are a mask and some tools (something that appears on every single page). In case the images are not clear, the following text is provided at the bottom of the page:
The message itself is thus fairly straightforward: theft and enslavement are the problems. The guilty are identified by image in the pictures and by deed in the text. They are not named or mentioned by race. Indeed, the references to them are somewhat vague (they are known by sight alone). While the victimized, the aggrieved and the potentially mobilized are shown in shackles (i.e., the condition that is in need of repair), the majority of the images are positive. =Indeed, they are depicted as something worthy of attention as well as returning to: Africa. Another interesting element concerns the number of blacks relative to the number of whites that are shown. Although the Africans are in bondage and whites have weapons, there are numerically more Africans in every scene. This appears to communicate that on some level blacks would likely have proven victorious, if they were willing to struggle against the slavers – en masse. Such a theme recurs throughout the children’s book: whites never outnumber blacks. The themes identified above are broadly consistent with other characterizations in the book. For example, in “J is for Jobs, Justice and Judgement,” four white men in suits are in court charged with racism, unemployment, oppression and brutality. The jury is all composed of blacks (at least 9 shown) and the person seemingly presiding over the court (although they sit below the four whites) is also black. All of this takes place below an image of a series of row houses being built by and presumably for African Amerikans, under the red, black and green flag of the RNA. A little African icon sits to the left. The message: a new nation is being built; one complete with housing, employment and true justice where whites pay for what they have done.  Next up: The Prognosis/Solution.
Black to the Future, Part 13: 1969 @ 2019, a 50 year Retrospective of the Republic of New Africa4/1/2019  New Bethel Incident at #52; RNA events in blue; Detroit Police Department surveillance of RNA Series Intro Almost four years ago, my book about the Republic of New Africa (RNA) came out entitled "How Social Movements Die: Repression and Demobilization of the Republic of New Africa. In the book, I attempted to strike a balance between theory and social science versus simply telling the story of the RNA. Unfortunately, I had to leave a lot of information out of the book and some of the details that were otherwise fascinating were eliminated. In this series, I revisit the archive and present the material 50 years later. Apologies for not being able to continue this piece for a while but life interfered. Enjoy. I will try to work my way backwards from this event as well as forwards. From Non-Violence to ViolenceAfter New Bethel, the Republic of New Africa in particular and black folks in Detroit as well as throughout the US in general were convinced that there was a campaign to destroy the organization. The evidence always proved to be somewhat lacking for the claim. For example, the RNA was clearly under surveillance. The homes of members were watched as well as the meeting places for organizational functions. Below, you can see the number of attendees for RNA functions as estimated by informants (several thousand events were identified in total). The group was clearly generating attention.  What one does not see from the records, however, is a clear pattern of violent or aggressive police behavior. Now, there were arrests that took place but there was no violent resistance when this happened. The first real encounter that the RNA has with the police is New Bethel. This is very different from other black nationalist organizations such as the Black Panther Party. But there it was at the New Bethel Incident - an unleashing of violence on both sides: first by the RNA and then by the police. Imari Obadele recalls the latter well in an unpublished memoir: I remember... being trapped in the basement of New Bethel Church, while Detroit police poured some 800 rounds in an around us. I did not want to die; I could have listed a hundred things I wished to do and needed to do before I checked out. But there we were: trapped, finally, in a dark and narrow stretch of the basement, with bullets ricocheting along the stairway above our heads. We were to die through stupidity, through my failure to check the army, to monitor its procedures and make sure it really was ready to carry out its assigned missions. We were to be killed like rats or wild hogs. And when at last I stood alone with my face to a darkened corner, my coat thrown over the back of my head by the dainty-minded white policeman whose shotgun, cocked, was pressed at the base of my skull, my last thought was a regret that in this life I would not again see my wife. But I knew the others were dying well too --- unwilling but uncringing. Well. They were dying like Brother James Dawkins, a monumental hero of our struggle, once accused of being in an Underground Army unit that on the night of Martin Luther King’s assassination, trapped and machine gunned two white policemen in a patrol car and then won freedom in a brilliant murder trial conducted by Gaidi and O. Lee Molette. Dawkins, shot and knocked down during an early barrage, while he was standing on the pulpit, lay there without a cringe as a policeman who recognized him and called his name, emptied his gun at him, striking Dawkins twice more; then, still alive, barely conscious, he spat at his captors, “Go to hell!” as they sat with him in a patrol car outside the hospital, threatening to let him bleed to death if he did not tell them where he and his wife and three little boys now lived. They were dying like young Larrie Edwards, married scarcely three weeks, who shot down in front of the pulpit, cursed his tormentors and challenged them to kill him as they dragged and stepped on him and kicked him. They were dying like my son Imari, Jr., scarcely five weeks past his thirteenth birthday, him in the uniform of the Junior Black Legion and, like the other Legionnaires, using their bodies to calm and shield the women and children while the sudden, 800-rounds of bullets crashed in and around them, as bullet-proof-jacketed white beasts in uniform vented a hatred for us that some of us had never really thought possible --- and, then, with lights on again in the cavernous sanctuary and the unbelieving survivors lined up 150 strong facing the walls, their hands up against the walls over their heads, and the Legionnaires pulled aside and whipped and placed under cocked guns because they were the soldiers but spitting magnificent black defiance --- because they knew how to die well. And dying like Brother Abdullah Mohammad who, like Brother Oba, walked between bullets when the unannounced attack on us began, time and gain, to see to the people and that my orders were begin carried out, and Brother Oba, who never left my side because duty said his duty, even unto death, lay in the security of his government’s officials. Dying well. Brother Ware Bey, walking calmly with me among our people in the black basement corridor where we had been driven and trapped, he and I sharing a bitter curse at ourselves, and a quiet bitter joke at ourselves, because the enemy through our stupidity was going to kill so many at one time whom, from his point of view, most needed to be killed. And then it was over. The RNA was removed.
Black to the Future, Part 12: 1969 @ 2019, a 50 year Retrospective of the Republic of New Africa3/31/2019  Series Intro Almost four years ago, my book about the Republic of New Africa (RNA) came out entitled "How Social Movements Die: Repression and Demobilization of the Republic of New Africa. In the book, I attempted to strike a balance between theory and social science versus simply telling the story of the RNA. Unfortunately, I had to leave a lot of information out of the book and some of the details that were otherwise fascinating were eliminated. In this series, I revisit the archive and present the material 50 years later. Apologies for not being able to continue this piece for a while but life interfered. Enjoy. I will try to work my way backwards from this event as well as forwards. After the Shooting StopsThe shooting at New Bethel Baptist church only lasts for about 20 minutes or so. At the end, one officer is dead, one officer is injured, four RNA members are injured and the church itself has several hundred bullet holes in it - an investigation later reveals that most of them are coming in (i.e., from the police) with a few going out (i.e., from the RNA). Upon gaining entry Detroit Police Department essentially arrests all individuals in the church. The time is around 1-2am. All told, 155 individuals were arrested at one time. It is commonly reported that about 140-145 were arrested but I have the police summaries of those in their custody on that evening. The arrested were later brought to a nearby police station, imprisoned and repeatedly interrogated through the next day before most were released. Part of the reason why New Bethel stands out is the fact that up until that time the RNA had largely been left alone (at least overtly). This event was far from normal for the organization. Indeed, it represents the largest single mass arrest that the group experienced in its history and it followed a shootout that left individuals dead as well as injured. In short, the event was highly traumatizing and clearly signaled the high-risk nature of the claims making effort the RNA was engaged in. Still, while the raid, interrogation, and arrests were more severe than any repression the movement had previously experienced, this coercion did not kill any of the RNA participants. In this sense, it differs greatly from other forms of repression directed at eliminating organizational leaders and activists, such as targeted assassinations or disappearances. While interrogating members, diverse forms of information were taken (which would prove to be useful for the state):
The police also attached a photo. In addition to the daily surveillance records, this allowed the government to have a rather extensive understanding of the RNA. For example, one could easily figure out which members of the group under arrest were on the radar of different policing organizations (displayed below). Now, I am not saying that this was done but that it could be.  One also could tell from these records how many members were in attendance (155 people were arrested that evening) as well as which members were in attendance and from what locales. Records indicate members from Tuskeege, Alabama; Crintinden, Arkansas; Hughes, Arkansas; Compton, California; Los Angeles, California; Chicago, Illinois; Lexington, Kentucky; Louisville, Kentucky; Metairie, Louisiana; New Orleans, Louisiana; Boston, Massachusetts; Cambridge, Massachusetts; Brooklyn, New York; Bronx, New York; New York, New York; Jamaica, New York; Columbus, Mississippi; Detroit, Michigan; Ann Arbor, Michigan; Akron, Ohio; Cincinnati, Ohio; Cleveland, Ohio; Dayton, Ohio; Springfield, Ohio; Wilberforce, Ohio; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Memphis, Tennessee; Washington, DC. Now, not all members in Detroit at the time were arrested. Several members of the New York chapter escaped once they heard about what happened at New Bethel. We know this because an informant was in their midst who later provided information about what those with them had been doing.
Black to the Future, Part 11: 1969 @ 2019, a 50 year Retrospective of the Republic of New Africa3/29/2019  RNA press conference following New Bethel Incident Series Intro Almost four years ago, my book about the Republic of New Africa (RNA) came out entitled "How Social Movements Die: Repression and Demobilization of the Republic of New Africa. In the book, I attempted to strike a balance between theory and social science versus simply telling the story of the RNA. Unfortunately, I had to leave a lot of information out of the book and some of the details that were otherwise fascinating were eliminated. In this series, I revisit the archive and present the material 50 years later. Apologies for not being able to continue this piece for a while but life interfered. Enjoy. I will try to work my way backwards from this event as well as forwards. The Second National Legislative Convention and the New Bethel Incident 50 years ago a group of several hundred black nationalists from around the United States came together in order to assess what they had done when they created the Republic of New Africa (the RNA). Confronted with an America that seemed to not only hinder black success and integration but which seemed to be actively engaged in a campaign to systematically constrain or potentially destroy them, the RNA had decided to conduct a census of the black population in order to ask what they wanted to do regarding their citizenship, politically secede from the United States, acquire 5 states in the deep south (in the "Black Belt") to develop a new nation, acquire reparations for the move as well as development, and obtain recognition for the new government. This was to be the Second National Legislative convention and two different types of people could attend: 1) Duly elected representatives (i.e., persons that attended the founding convention, elected representatives from consulates which did not have ten signers of the Declaration and individuals in cities/areas/college campuses where there were ten or fewer citizens) and 2) observers (i.e., regular folk who were interested). At this event, the RNA was expecting to deliberate and pass laws as well as construct hearings on diverse topics. While this sounds kind of out there, it really wasn't and this was acknowledged by the RNA. Indeed, there had been numerous efforts in this direction: e.g., Edward P. McCabe in the latter part of the 1800s as well as Oscar Brown and Bindley Cyrus in the early 1900s with their National Movement for the Establishment of a Forty-Ninth State and Nation of Islam. The convention began (at about 8;30pm on March 28th at the C.B. Club) with an overview of the Ocean Hill Brownsville project where the RNA had been quite active in trying to get this community to secede. Almost a dozen RNA citizens from Brooklyn were in attendance and they each spoke about what was going on there - i.e., prep for plebiscite, discussion about morale in the community, etc. Ocean Hill had been controversial because it represented something of an opportunistic pivot for the RNA: it was not in the deep south (their primary target) and there was no consulate or concentrated RNA presence (the nearest consulate was in Manhattan and they did not appear to solidly support the effort - feeling rolled by the central leadership in general and Minister Imari Obadele in particular). I'll discuss this more in another blogpost. Following this discussion, the meeting was broken down into different ministries for more specific discussions and the meeting ended at around 2am. While the official meeting ended, smaller groups would continue into the next morning discussing talking points and plans of action for the next day. Continuing on Saturday (March 29th), the meeting picked up where it left off. Feeling the tension around the effort, Obadele put forward the reasons for the RNA continuing in Brooklyn. He stated that Ocean Hill Brownsville was precisely what the RNA was talking about. The community there (engaged in a heated discussion of local/community control regarding education as well as other socio-political services) was ripe for secession and the global media was present for the discussion. This was the group's Selma. Herman Ferguson continued this discussion noting that the Freedom Corps had been tasked with assisting the effort and that everyone from receptionists to nurses to writers were needed to create a new political entity. Virginia Collins then asked a host of questions regarding the effort - what it meant, how it could be helped and so forth. This convention closed at around 8pm so that members could attend a rally held at New Bethel Baptist church (Aretha Franklin's father's church) at 10pm. Following the rally (around 11:30pm), there was an altercation between Detroit police department and RNA security forces generally referred to as "the New Bethel Incident". At its conclusion, one police officer was left dead, another officer as well as 4 RNA members were injured, New Bethel Baptist church was shot up as well as raided by at least 50 police officers from diverse precincts, and approximately 150 people were arrested/interrogated (several of the events are depicted in the illustration below).  Next: the aftermath of the New Bethel Incident
Black to the Future, Part 10: 1968 @ 2018, a 50 year Retrospective of the Republic of New Africa5/20/2018  Series Intro Almost two years ago, my book about the Republic of New Africa (RNA) came out entitled "How Social Movements Die: Repression and Demobilization of the Republic of New Africa. In the book, I attempted to strike a balance between theory and social science versus simply telling the story of the RNA. Unfortunately, I had to leave a lot of information out of the book and some of the details that were otherwise fascinating were eliminated. In this series, I revisit the archive and present the material 50 years later. Enjoy. Toward the 1st Legislative AssemblyImmediately the RNA moved to create local chapters called "consulates" under the leadership of bond chairmen who would lead the effort to fund the new nation through the issuing of bonds. Each city that wanted to start a consulate was told to set them up quickly in late April. As directed, the following guidelines were provided:
 The police were all over the RNA:   This type of form is clear. The police identified who was attending different types of meetings, where it was, what they talked about - in order.
|
Analog - The Anti-BlogBy "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. 
Archives
May 2021
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed
