A blogger who I have a great deal of respect for posted a few days ago about the White vs. Black blogospehre debate that I have been participating in recently. Her post was more a critique of another blogger, Francis Holland, who started this debate after he was booted from Daily Kos.
Ms. Tubman raised some very good points, and I would expect no less from her. But I must take issue with some of the things she said concerning Mr. Holland. Throughout her post, she seemed to be admonishing Mr. Holland for not blogging with the proper tone, or for being a "bull in a china cabinet" while he was allowed to post on Daily Kos. (To be fair, Ms. Tubman said she agreed with the message but not how it was being delivered) My question to Ms. Tubman would be this: Should we modify or stance on positions or the way we post in order to be allowed to participate in certain online discussions with white folks? I would certainly hope not, and if there are black bloggers out there doing that....well, let's just say that I hope they gave you a very nice "room" and computer in the house for your troubles.
Now I don't want to speak for Mr. Tubman, she is more than capable of speaking for herself. But I am sure she will say that her critiquing of Mr. Holland , was due mostly to the fact that he himself, seemed to really want back in with the Daily Kos crowd. So one could argue that her post was a road map for him to more or less find his way back in. But I doubt seriously that Mr. Hollands motivation was to simply get back on Kos just to say he could post there again. I suspect that his motivation was political, as he really seems to have a thing for Hillary, and he wanted to openly campaign for her on a site that clearly has kicked her to the curb. Mr. Holland suspects that his race has something to do with why he was kicked off. And while it may not have been a direct cause, I think the fact that he is black made the conversation-whatever it happened to be-more uncomfortable, even for the so called progressives over there at Kos.
Now let me be clear; as I have stated before, I could care less whether I interact with that crowd or not. Their issues aren't my issues, and visa versa. " So the rage against the machine bit is self created. If you want to talk about Iraq,or oil,or campaign finance reform,or deficit/debt..there's none of that on Field Negro" That would be corrct "Charlie", you won't get discussions here about the deficit,the national debt, campaign finance reform etc. You know why my progressive friend? Because most black folks out here don't give a f**k about those issues. We are too busy trying to hold down a nine to five and not get shot on our way home from work to be worrying about your f*****g campaign finance reform. Like it makes a difference whether a mother f****r can spend 100 million or 200 million of his own money. Poli-tricksters, democrats, and republicans, will always find a way around that sh**. Don't even get me started on these clueless,disconnected mother fu****s that I have to share country with. Sorry folks, that was a serious digression, and I tried to finish this post without cursing, (I guess they won't use this one at the Bob Dole Institute of Politics in Lawrence Kansas) but some people just set me off.
So anyway, back to Ms. Tubman's post. She had some wonderful and thought provoking suggestions towards the end. Should black bloggers come together around common goals and try to make ourselves stronger? Or should we seek more inclusion from white bloggers and combine our efforts with them around some common political agendas? Folks, I think you know where I stand on this issue. The problem is, well, I won't call their names, but there are bloggers out there like the Christian lady, Lasha...whoops I said no names, and a few more who know who they are; who would tear the freaking house down if they thought they couldn't get in. Unfortunately, because of their positions, and their way of making white folks feel good about themselves, these are the more popular sites among black bloggers. So the rest of us, who want to start unifying around issues that effect us, will have much more of an uphill battle ahead. It would be so much easier to sell out and write to make right wing "Charlie and left wing "Charlie" more comfortable, but some of us just can't and will never do that.
I loved Ms. Tubman's the idea of a black ad network, and more black empowerment economically. But again, that will call for more black progressive bloggers (why do I even use that word) coming together and being unified in our goals. That's easier said than done, but I have hope. I am starting to see more and more positive black bloggers out here every
day. (The usual posters to this site comes to mind.) People who are truly independent and could really give a damn about what "Charlie" thinks. The beauty of it is that many of these folks are new, and they haven't developed a large following just yet. So in a way, this is still virgin territory, and they can take this blogging thing in whatever direction they choose. It's too late for people like LaShawn, and Oliver, and Sh...whoops, I said I wouldn't call names. But that's what's so great about America, there are so many more of us out here, with so many resources, and so many points of views to express that even a few of us typing away in the house can't hold back our message. Because at the end of the day, the fields are so much bigger than the house, and there are so much more of us out here than in there.
Ms. Tubman raised some very good points, and I would expect no less from her. But I must take issue with some of the things she said concerning Mr. Holland. Throughout her post, she seemed to be admonishing Mr. Holland for not blogging with the proper tone, or for being a "bull in a china cabinet" while he was allowed to post on Daily Kos. (To be fair, Ms. Tubman said she agreed with the message but not how it was being delivered) My question to Ms. Tubman would be this: Should we modify or stance on positions or the way we post in order to be allowed to participate in certain online discussions with white folks? I would certainly hope not, and if there are black bloggers out there doing that....well, let's just say that I hope they gave you a very nice "room" and computer in the house for your troubles.
Now I don't want to speak for Mr. Tubman, she is more than capable of speaking for herself. But I am sure she will say that her critiquing of Mr. Holland , was due mostly to the fact that he himself, seemed to really want back in with the Daily Kos crowd. So one could argue that her post was a road map for him to more or less find his way back in. But I doubt seriously that Mr. Hollands motivation was to simply get back on Kos just to say he could post there again. I suspect that his motivation was political, as he really seems to have a thing for Hillary, and he wanted to openly campaign for her on a site that clearly has kicked her to the curb. Mr. Holland suspects that his race has something to do with why he was kicked off. And while it may not have been a direct cause, I think the fact that he is black made the conversation-whatever it happened to be-more uncomfortable, even for the so called progressives over there at Kos.
Now let me be clear; as I have stated before, I could care less whether I interact with that crowd or not. Their issues aren't my issues, and visa versa. " So the rage against the machine bit is self created. If you want to talk about Iraq,or oil,or campaign finance reform,or deficit/debt..there's none of that on Field Negro" That would be corrct "Charlie", you won't get discussions here about the deficit,the national debt, campaign finance reform etc. You know why my progressive friend? Because most black folks out here don't give a f**k about those issues. We are too busy trying to hold down a nine to five and not get shot on our way home from work to be worrying about your f*****g campaign finance reform. Like it makes a difference whether a mother f****r can spend 100 million or 200 million of his own money. Poli-tricksters, democrats, and republicans, will always find a way around that sh**. Don't even get me started on these clueless,disconnected mother fu****s that I have to share country with. Sorry folks, that was a serious digression, and I tried to finish this post without cursing, (I guess they won't use this one at the Bob Dole Institute of Politics in Lawrence Kansas) but some people just set me off.
So anyway, back to Ms. Tubman's post. She had some wonderful and thought provoking suggestions towards the end. Should black bloggers come together around common goals and try to make ourselves stronger? Or should we seek more inclusion from white bloggers and combine our efforts with them around some common political agendas? Folks, I think you know where I stand on this issue. The problem is, well, I won't call their names, but there are bloggers out there like the Christian lady, Lasha...whoops I said no names, and a few more who know who they are; who would tear the freaking house down if they thought they couldn't get in. Unfortunately, because of their positions, and their way of making white folks feel good about themselves, these are the more popular sites among black bloggers. So the rest of us, who want to start unifying around issues that effect us, will have much more of an uphill battle ahead. It would be so much easier to sell out and write to make right wing "Charlie and left wing "Charlie" more comfortable, but some of us just can't and will never do that.
I loved Ms. Tubman's the idea of a black ad network, and more black empowerment economically. But again, that will call for more black progressive bloggers (why do I even use that word) coming together and being unified in our goals. That's easier said than done, but I have hope. I am starting to see more and more positive black bloggers out here every
day. (The usual posters to this site comes to mind.) People who are truly independent and could really give a damn about what "Charlie" thinks. The beauty of it is that many of these folks are new, and they haven't developed a large following just yet. So in a way, this is still virgin territory, and they can take this blogging thing in whatever direction they choose. It's too late for people like LaShawn, and Oliver, and Sh...whoops, I said I wouldn't call names. But that's what's so great about America, there are so many more of us out here, with so many resources, and so many points of views to express that even a few of us typing away in the house can't hold back our message. Because at the end of the day, the fields are so much bigger than the house, and there are so much more of us out here than in there.
Once again, you put it down for the world to know the truth. And I very much agree with your sentiment about the world of blogging and especially "progressive Black" Bloggers. Yeah, I wonder why we even have to use those words, on the real!!
ReplyDeleteI'm sick of Black bloggers thinking they have to be down with Kos before their readership takes off.
ReplyDeleteKos can be for someone before he's against them. He's been caught in his own lie regarding support of Ned Lamont, before he started blogging he wasn't supporting Lamont's campaign. One of the commenters pulled up and linked Kos' own blog and caught him in that lie. I think Kos banned him for doing that.
They're progressive at Kos when Kos says so. Obama being viewed with skepticism by Black Folk who want to know who's water he's totin are getting flamed at Kos.
So, I whole heartedly agree that we Black progressive bloggers better quit waiting on Kos and do it ourselves.
I love this post.
ReplyDeleteMost white americans who proudly proclaim their liberal status are the most disconnected mofos I know and HATE being called on the BS.
It's a new day....it's time to hold up a mirror to their patronizing attitudes and cultural myopia.
Whether it be via blogs, dinner party chatter, work, pillow talk -- it's time that certain people (we know who they are) be brought into the 21st century.
Because the question is
do we want to live in a fair and equitable society or not?
I left a comment on J & J Politics saying a lot of what you said. Now, that said, I think some people are being too skeptical on Obama just to sound skeptical. Frankly I don't care who's water he's toting. He's black, he ain't some "humonculus" (remember that word?) like the right wing creates (Steele, Condi, loonies like Alan Keyes, Uncle Tom mega-preachers, etc.) and so it's time to make history. I want to see him take the oath of office not 50 yards from where we were sold as property. Hillary and Edwards can't provide that. I have no problem saying that on Koz, or on some the whitey conservative blogs.
ReplyDeletePS Let's not forget the true enemy, by the way. Booker Rising et al. must be destroyed. I won't let little fights like Koz vs. the brothas, Hillary vs. Obama dissuade me from my goal...hahaha
ReplyDeleteGreat post. You really speak with passion. You talk about a topic that many people don't/won't talk about.
ReplyDeleteThanks c-dell. Chris, you have some issues my man! And I swear I am going to get to the bottom of your beef with BR :)
ReplyDeleteGood post. I haven't read anything by Mr. Holland that would warrant him being banned.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate, even when I disagree, the brutal honesty of certain Black Blogs. But, I don't think that such honesty would be welcome on certain left ' mainstream' blogs.
They really don't want to hear it.
I wish you would address in a blog why blacks do not wish to interact with whites. If we interact more instead of self, segregate, we may solve our own personal distrust issues. Also curious why so many blacks believe that the white majority are the root of their problems?
ReplyDeletesam said "I wish you would address in a blog why blacks do not wish to interact with whites."
ReplyDeleteYou think we will trust each other more if we interact with each other less?! The logic eludes me...
The white majority is at the root of the problem because they knowingly benefit from the problem and have made little to no effort to actually address the problem, because to do so would eliminate their privilege.
I had not read much of the brother on Kos, mostly because I have already rejected much of what comes out of Kos as the same old BS with a pseudo progressive democratic twist. That includes most of the Black bloggers that manage to make it to the mainstream. Occasionally educational, often entertaining, but BS nonetheless.
People like Field, and myself will never be mainstream, probably not even mainstream in the "Blackosphere". So keep on getting it off your chest!! I know I will.
02 18 07
ReplyDeleteYeah I don't know what Mr. Chambers' beef is with BR, but it is a good site and is in a similar spirit to what you have invoked Field!
This was a nice post. I think for so long Blacks had to accomodate the will of Mr. Charlie because we had no other choice. Now, we have many, many choices! We need to start thinking outside of the box more and let our creative juices flow.
I don't understand why Mr. Holland even cares about the DK crowd. Who really gives a damn? Mr. Holland should not try to be included in their garbage! As you have aptly pointed out Field, their issues are not our issues.
One thing that many people don't get is that Blacks are traditionally conservative AND liberal at the same time. Our politics don't really fall lock in step with Mr. Charlie's because we had to develop our own sense of political expedience.
I say screw inclusion (unless the goals are the same) and we need to work from within ourselves and our own communities to solve our own problems.
I am not part of the Whiteosphere or the Blackosphere really. I go to sites that pique my interests! So I guess you could say that I was part of the -padic sphere hehehehehehe
Great Post Field, Personally I don't giive a flying Sh** what whites thing about my blog or my blogging. It's my opinions. I will never allow white folk to decide my opinion or decide how I think. Period. You, Exodus mentality, Mahndisa, Rikyrah, Chambers, Christian progressive, and others are right! Forget about Dailykos. Write your opinions on your site the way you want, for your people, your ideas, your dreams.
ReplyDeleteEvery time I post about politics, I think about my brother and sisters in who cried, died and survived in New Orleans while white politicans did little of nothing and Black politicans did just about the same. I think about the taking over of American cities through Gentrification while black folks lose their homes. While the CBC does nothing, while Black mayors allow it, and while blacks vote for candidates who could give a sh**.
I think about the people of Iraq and American warmongers. Yes Field Negro, It's time for black folk to shake it up. Inside and outside of the blogsphere.
But as Jill of Jack and Jill Politics was saying, when inside, know how to do it to get the best outcome.
Field:
ReplyDeleteThanks for telling the truth. They certainly do talk about a lot of esoteric bullshit over at DailyKos, but there is one thing that isn't esoteric or bullshit and you put your finger on it: The question is who will be the next president of the United States and whether we will finally end the 43-term white male monopoly of the Presidency in 2008.
I'm of the opinion that if we break that monopoly with ANY of our non white-male candidates, it will be easier for all of our leaders (and all of us) to be taken seriously in the future. http://francislholland.blogspot.com/2007/02/clintons-appointed-more-blacks-than-any.html
But we have to end the "white male supremacy paradigm" in 2008 - the paradigm that says that anything that white men do is better than EVERYTHING that everybody else does. We end this paradigm simply by electing selecting a nominee and electing a candidate who excellent and who is NOT a white male, for once. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/12/13/17134/488
I wrote a lot of diaries at DailyKos saying why Hillary Clinton was our best bet for this pilot project, and that's why I got banned there. Had I advocated for a white male supremacy paradigm candidate like Al Gore or John Edwards, while attacking the only woman in the race like they do, then I would not have gotten banned. http://francislholland.blogspot.com/2007/02/supporting-edwards-perpetuates-status.html
DailyKos is important because it aspires to being the "voice of the Left". You and I are part of the Left and DailyKos doesn't speak for us anymore than it speaks for Alutian Eskimos! If we don't criticize DailyKos and the rest of the whitosphere openly, they'll show up in Washington and on talk show pretending to speak for the Left, while saying that both Hillary and Barack are unacceptable for one "progressive" reason or another. And then, as in years past, our choices will be narrowed to the white men, as if they were the only ones who knew how to get us into the kind of mess we're in now.
Let's all raise our voices and say what we want out of the 2008 elections, before Kos convinces everyone that he speaks for us when he spouts his hypocritical "progessive" ex-Reagan Republican bullshit.
Yes, Progressive Markos of DailyKos was a Reagan-Republican throughout the 1980's!
http://francislholland.blogspot.com/2007/01/markos-was-republican-states-rights.html
http://www.cato-unbound.org/2006/10/02/markos-moulitsas/the-case-for-the-libertarian-democrat/
He was a Republican "state's rights" advocate, and now he wants to tell Democrats (including Black people) what's good for us, while selecting our candidates for us?!!! F**ck that!
ElitistJohn here,
ReplyDeleteFrancis,
Wow, that's some nice revisionist history there. So, everyone at Kos is supporting "white male supremacy", even though Obama usually wins out in the straw polls, Edwards second. Interesting definitions you are operating under.
BTW - Its also interesting that on MyDD you're one of the first to drop the "not enough experience" line that is considered "code words" elsewhere when talking about Obama. Funny how you skipped that when posting here as well.
There's nothing more nauseating than a royalist using otherwise valid issues to hide behind, while shilling for a royal family.