MICHAEL O. ALLEN

Tag

civil rights

Muhammad Ali’s Dream

By HomepageNo Comments

AliIt is a strange process that we put all our heroes and heroines through.

First, we seen them as dangerous and revile them. Then, in death, we (even their former antagonists and adversaries) adopt them and turn them into everything we wished the hero to be, everything we could not make them be when alive.

Much as we turned Martin Luther King, Jr. into a plaster saint that even the racists among us could quote to our own ends, so too shall we render Muhammad Ali.

For Ali, the process actually began when he lighted the Olympic flame at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics.

It was the first time the whole world saw how much Parkinson’s Disease had taken from Ali. Though, an apparition by the time he turned up in Atlanta, he stood tall, powerful and defiant still.

But because he could not really speak for himself, not anymore, people started speaking for him and saying for him things that he might not have said for himself.

His death may complete that process of sainthood. He would be fitted with feet of clay, the better to keep him in place. Writer Dave Zirin is cautioning against that in a Los Angeles Times opinion-editorial.

Kirin wrote:

“His life was one of polarization and reconciliation, anger and love, and a ferocious, uncompromising commitment to nonviolence, all delivered through the scandalously dirty vessel of corruption known as boxing. Few have ever walked so confidently and casually from man to myth, and that journey was well earned.”

I’ll quote one more passage but this article is required for anyone who ever cared about Ali and what he stood for:

“Ali’s death, however, should be an opportunity to remember what made him so dangerous in the first place. The best place to start would be to recall the part of him that died decades ago: his voice. No athlete, no politician, no preacher ever had a voice quite like his or used it as effectively as he did. Ali’s voice was playful, lilting, with a rhythm that matched his otherworldly footwork in the boxing ring. It’s a voice that forced you to listen lest you miss a joke, a gibe or a flash of joy.”

In a series of interviews with the BBC’s Michael Parkinson, Ali expanded on his views about everything under the sun. The most iconic of those interviews was the first one, which took place Oct. 17, 1971.

Some of what Ali remarked on then are commonplace today and are taken for granted. But, when Ali spoke, not only did African-Americans lack much power and rights, our society, including the power of our own government, resisted the civil rights movement.

Learnin’

By HomepageNo Comments

What I’m Learning (Slowly) From Obama


user-pic

It’s well known by now that Barack Obama learns from his mistakes and tries hard not to make them twice. So can those of us who supported him. Even here on what we fancy is the right side of history, we can look at our own mistakes candidly in order to learn from them, painful though that may be.

My use of “we” is rhetorical, if not imperial, of course, since my own performance as a commentator was so flawless. But, seriously, folks: Obama has a lot to teach at least a few of us about managing anger and about subordinating our righteous moralism to strategic generosity in order to win truly moral gains.

Right though I am to have insisted, from years of experience, that whites would vote in large numbers for blacks (See the “Voting Wrongs” chapter in Liberal Racism, or this 1996 article from The New Republic),-I was wrong to be churlish and self-righteous toward white-liberal and black activist defenders of racial-identity politics who built their careers and politics on the presumption of racial bloc voting – and, indeed, on the presumption that racial groupthink is the flywheel of politics and public policy.

Wrong though their own presumptions were, those people had plausible reasons for clinging to them. And the irony is that even as Obama – the candidate I could only dream of as I wrote Liberal Racism — vindicated my insistence that movements for justice have to transcend race in order to uproot racism and some of its structural supports, it was I who wavered in that faith as the test of Nov. 4 drew nigh.

Continue . . .

The Civil-Rights Issue of Our Time

By HomepageNo Comments

While much of the country is rightly focused on the presidential election, there’s no contest more important to me this year than an initiative on the ballot in California. If it passes with a simple majority, Proposition 8 will take away the fundamental right to marry for same-sex couples in that state. The measure has the heavy financial backing of the Mormon church, and recent polls suggest that the outcome could be very close.

I strongly oppose Proposition 8 because it’s unfair and wrong. Please join me in donating here. There’s still time to have an impact, and no amount is too small. And if you vote in California, please vote No on Prop 8.

You might wonder why I care at all about Prop 8. I live in Georgia. I’m straight. And I’m already married. What’s in it for me?

Well, you see, this issue is personal for me. My wife and I are an interracial couple. She’s black. I’m white. We’re both mindful that, not so long ago, interracial marriage was illegal in our home state. We believe very strongly that loving couples should have the right to marry without fear of discrimination. Our own marriage was only possible because the United States Supreme Court struck down Virginia’s ban on interracial marriage, and I shudder to think what my life would be like today if the right to marry someone of a different race or color had been put to a majority vote.

Yet that’s precisely what thousands of same-sex couples in California face right now. A referendum on human dignity and equality.

We can’t let Prop 8 pass. This is too important. This is the civil rights issue of our time, and we must rise to the challenge. Do something — please.

Go to www.noonprop8.com to help, or make a donation here.

Cross-posted from Facebook.

“Respect” and other words

By HomepageNo Comments

There’s this new political advertisement out from the McCain-Palin presidential campaign that again tries to stoke the anger of those Hillary Clinton supporters, you know, “white,” “working-class” and “women” voters still mad at Sen. Barack Obama about the alleged disrespectful treatment of Mrs. Clinton during the primaries.

In the McCain campaign’s calculation, Gov. Sarah Palin is interchangeable with Sen. Clinton and any criticism of Mrs. Palin is another slap at women.

ANNOUNCER:

He was the world’s biggest celebrity, but his star’s fading.

So they lashed out at Sarah Palin.

Dismissed her as “good looking.”

That backfired, so they said she was doing, “what she was told.”

Then desperately called Sarah Palin a liar.

How disrespectful.

And how Governor Sarah Palin proves them wrong, every day.

JOHN MCCAIN: I’m John McCain and I approved this message.

This is a despicably racist political advertisement and here’s why:

The ad takes up the “uppity” angle because of the sensitivity of women, especially white women, to being criticized by black men. But let’s put aside, for now, the historical clash between the struggles for the civil rights of women and people of color in this country and let us focus, instead, on the code words employed in this political advertisement.

The word “disrespectful” in this context is so loaded, especially when you consider our nation’s history and culture. In this ad, it is not just a man disrespecting a woman, or men disrespecting women. It is a black man, Obama, disrespecting a white woman, Sarah Palin. And he has a history of doing this. Remember Hillary Clinton, the ad, without saying so (it doesn’t have to), reminds viewers.

But Obama’s crime here, whether he was the one who said the actual words or not, is more egregious: He dismissed Palin as “good looking.”

Noticing a white woman throughout the history of this nation got black men lynched and murdered.

The whole rationale for McCain’s candidacy in hinging on this: Don’t let this uppity black man violate our cherished White House.

I won’t ask how long Sen. McCain will continue putting his name to these disgusting, underhanded and shameful campaign advertisements. I have never labored under the illusion that McCain was an honorable man. This unscrupulous campaign is exactly who John McCain is, a corrupt, craven politicians who will use anything, including racist codes, to get elected.

McCain says he’ll stop this gutter politics only if Sen. Obama agrees to go on a barnstorming nationwide tour of town hall style debates with him. The “I’ll stop sliming you if you debate me” strategy? How do you define Chutzpah?

McCain does not want a debate. He is doing exactly what he wants. Obama should call his bluff and agree to appear on stage with him.

. . . considering the import of history

By HomepageNo Comments

King’s “Dream” speech

I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves, who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.

Read More

Don’t Pass The Ammunition; Mayor holds off on new bullets

By Homepage, New York Daily NewsNo Comments

March 5, 1997

by BOB LIFF, MICHAEL O. ALLEN and JOHN MARZULLI, Daily News Staff Writers

Mayor Giuliani put the brakes on the police plan to arm cops with controversial hollow-point bullets yesterday — demanding to see studies on the expanding rounds before approving the change.

Giuliani summoned Police Commissioner Howard Safir and his top brass to City Hall to brief him on the switch, which would replace the full metal jacket police bullet with a round that expands on impact and is less likely to ricochet.

The mayor said he believes the bullets would be safer for cops and civilians, but insisted he needs more time to study the sensitive issue.

“I asked them to see all the studies so that I can review them personally,” he said after meeting with police brass. “They went over some of them with me. They are going to get me more because I want to look into this issue carefully.”

“It is not a done deal until I finally approve it,” Giuliani said as City Council members prepared to grill Safir on the switch to hollow-points at a previously scheduled public safety hearing today.

Civil rights advocates have long criticized the snub-nose bullets, which create gruesome wounds but are more likely to stop a suspect. Elected city officials said yesterday they also want to hear more about the changeover before throwing their support behind it.

“Right now we in the Council have more questions than answers,” said Speaker Peter Vallone, (D-Queens).

Councilman Enoch Williams (D-Brooklyn) called the hollow-points “a license to kill.”

“It means that if someone makes a mistake out there . . . a youngster 15, 16 years old that maybe does something the police officer doesn’t like . . . and he shoots, that kid is finished,” Williams said.

“It should be disturbing to all elected leaders and citizens that the NYPD could just introduce these bullets without any briefing or public hearing about the implications,” said Michael Meyers, executive director of the New York Civil Rights Coalition.

Police officials argue that hollow-points do not ricochet and rarely pass through walls or the body of an intended target — lessening the risk to bystanders from stray bullets.

New York is virtually alone among major police departments and law enforcement agencies in using full metal jacket bullets.

Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association President Lou Matarazzo applauded the change, saying the advantages of the hollow-points “outweigh the risks” to cops and civilians.

Giuliani said he understands the potential benefits for police. He said the decision on hollow-points was made by then-Commissioner William Bratton before he resigned in April. The mayor said he did not disagree “at the time” with Bratton’s decision.

But Bratton told the Daily News he “did not recall” signing off on the new bullets before he left, although he would have approved the hollow-points.

Bratton, who had a stormy relationship with Giuliani during his last months as commissioner, said he believes the mayor was angry that Safir made the announcement Monday.

“The mayor doesn’t like media surprises, so he’ll hold off on it for a while to reinforce that he doesn’t like being surprised,” Bratton said.

Critics of the bullets have also said they pose a danger to cops who accidentally shoot themselves or their partners.

Since 1981, 51 officers have been wounded by so-called friendly fire.