Clarification of April 3rd Post...

I received this comment on my April 3rd post and I wanted to reprint it here along with my response because even though I know what I'm thinking and then trying to say, sometimes I am unclear. I appreciate feedback that helps me get better at it!

==========================================

the first domino said:

"Deb: I believe he was equating the state of American politics, policies and business at the time, to the "Burning House" - a house in which Blacks had NO hand in building. I agree. Yet, his statement seems more grim than that. It almost suggests a "separation doctrine." I believe that Rev. King was keenly aware of the corruptive power of white America, that it had traded its soul in it's endeavor to surpass economically the rest of the world. I believe that he felt that the souls of black people were also at risk in this country. I believe that he felt that integration would put us in the middle of that corruption, and that the result would be catastrophic for us as well: we, too, pursuing the American dream as it was then fashioned, would lose our collective souls. Better to stand apart than go down with a house built on slavery, harsh segregation, and a economic system more materialistic than compassionate. And Rev. King's following statement is both intriguing and challenging. “Become the firemen. Let’s not stand by and let the house burn.” Surely he wasn't advocating the preservation of a failed house, or those who had set it on fire in the first place. Firemen put fires out. Maybe the firemen he had in mind were those among us willing to replace the house with a more fireproof one, or douse the fires already burning by giving the country a new fireproof direction. What is needed, then, are political carpenters and masons, as well as able firemen. The house, then, could be rebuilt within the structure of the old house using the old foundation, via life-affirming, political policies, economic compassion, and racial equality, or outside of the house--a violent takeover of the house. The former is my preference, and it was probably Dr. King's preference, as well. But one never knows."

========================================

I responded: the first domino...Hey, how are you?? You are saying exactly what I meant though I did not delineate each point you raise - I have to do better on that. I don't agree, however that he was suggesting a "separation doctrine" as that course would be counter to everything he spent his life trying to achieve. I believe, as you stated, "Maybe the firemen he had in mind were those among us willing to replace the house with a more fireproof one, or douse the fires already burning by giving the country a new fireproof direction." My list was an illustration of those who many of us THOUGHT WOULD BE, OR WERE, THE FIREMEN TO DATE - but as it turns out, they HAVEN'T BEEN AND ARE NOT. Rather, they have, along with those who set the house afire in the first place, helped to "preserve the failed house" - Sen. Obama included. We are saying the same things - you just said it more clearly. Hey! I'm working on being a better writer with the ability to clearly and succinctly express my thoughts so they are easily understood. Comments help me tremendously in figuring out how to do that. Thanks! I'm posting your comment on the blog to clarify my point for the one or two people who've read it.

Deferring the " Dream" for the "Burning House"

A few years ago at a State of the Black Union event, I remember an interview with Harry Belafonte wherein he shared one of his last conversations with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. He said Dr. King told him, “I fear, I am integrating my people into a burning house.” Concerned, he asked Dr. King, “What should we do?” Dr. King replied, “Become the firemen. Let’s not stand by and let the house burn.”


That tete-a-tete kept popping into my head all day, so much so that I've had trouble finishing this post. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall for the entire conversation, then I wouldn't have to speculate about what Dr. King actually meant. But I wasn't. So, drawing on my own life experiences in the Jim Crow South, I believe he was equating the state of American politics, policies and business at the time, to the "Burning House" - a house in which Blacks had NO hand in building.


Racism, more overt than covert, was both institutionalized and personal; poverty was then, as it is now, overwhelming for the have-nots and ignored by the haves; the Vietnam War, like Iraq, was un-winnable and unconscionable but, we kept fighting. Then, largely through his efforts, Blacks were thrust, uninitiated, into the "games" those politicians knew all too well how to play in order to line their pockets, stroke their own egos, bamboozle the people and maintain the status quo.


I'm so tired of this cliche, but both parts still hold so much truth: Blacks have come a long way, but we still have a long way to go. The games, the political calculations and machinations, the "burning house" strategies - still exist. The only difference is the faces of the gamesmen have morphed into our own. We need only look to this very small, partial list to realize both halves of the truth in the cliche:

• Former D.C. mayor, Marion Barry
• Detroit mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick
• Former Louisiana Congressman William J. Jefferson
• Former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, Gen. Colin Powell
• Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice
• Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas
• Former HUD Secretary, Alphonso Jackson
• Talk-radio show hosts Armstrong Williams and Michael Baisden
• Prior presidential candidates, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton
• Television talk-show host, Oprah Winfrey
• Actor and comedian, Dr. Bill Cosby
• NPR Senior Correspondent, Juan Williams
• Presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama

The house WAS, and still is burning. And yes, the senator from Illinois has especially learned how to play those games very well (an interesting article from Todd Spivak of the Houston Press lays out some of his lessons). One has to admit that using the color of his skin and channelling MLK or Malcolm X to get the Black vote, then distancing himself from them after he's gotten what he wanted so as not to upset white folks, is perfect - for him! Having used Rev. Wright and his congregation to firmly plant his image in the Black community, then denouncing him when the shit hit the fan, to only later come back and tell white folks what they wanted to hear to assuage their guilt by excusing the reverend as some old, doddering, retiring, used-to-have-been is brilliant, learned, "burning house" strategy. Even Sun Tzu would have been proud!


Don't get me wrong, for minorities, learning those "games" was and remains essential to surviving and trying to thrive in the burning house. But Sen. Obama's pouring more fuel on the fire, through playing the same games that held us in bondage, is not where I expected we'd be after 40+ years. I, like Dr. King, thought we would be the firemen.


During the afore-mentioned State of the Black Union event, Dr. Cornel West said, “We must transform the House.” Much as I admire Dr. West, I don't see much transformation in the senator from Illinois.