Wrong for the right reasons
Stanley Crouch lambasts the civil rights establishment over the whose death or mistreatment they show outrage over. Though I'm very concerned about violence in the Black community and particularly disturbed about those that take a dump on the dining room table, as it were, Crouch's editorial is wrong headed.
Civil Rights organizations exist for specific purposes and it is fitting that they show some focus in their activities. Just as one wouldn't charge the FBI with laxness because they don't pursue every murder but would if they ignored any kidnapping, one shouldn't expect civil rights organizations to pursue every violence act but should expect them to pursue every act that violates the civil rights of those they represent.
The problem isn't that there's a division of labor, it's that every division isn't adequately covered, or covered correctly. Yet, assuming Crouch is as concerned over the victims of violence as the existance of civil rights organizations that focus on civil rights, I can forgive him for raising the issue.
Civil rights leaders show selective rage The tragic murder of City Councilman James Davis brought great attention to his career. He is rightfully mourned, if only because of how far ahead of the civil rights establishment this highly principled man was. He was willing to face the epidemic of urban violence, push for better alliances between the police and communities and bring together hip-hop writers and entertainers opposed to the oppression of those communities by murderous thugs.
Given Davis' example, you might ask what the civil rights leaders and black elected officials who represent terrorized urban neighborhoods are doing about this problem. Largely nothing, from what I can tell.
Let us say that Davis was just another hardworking black man who was highly regarded by his friends. Let us say that he was gunned down in a public place in East Harlem or inner Brooklyn or the South Bronx. Let us add that he, like a recent Brooklyn victim, was killed by a member of the Bloods because he was going to testify against a gang member in a murder trial.
Would the civil rights establishment or local black elected officials or the Rev. Al Sharpton have made much of his murder? I don't think so, because there is no substantial record of their showing any overt concern about such issues, which is why Davis' sustained campaign against violence was unique.
…As historian Leon Litwack observes, 4,742 black people were lynched between 1882 and 1968, a period of 86 years. Thugs in Los Angeles have more than doubled that number in just 20 years. Had the Los Angeles culprits been white gangs, they would not have been allowed to kill even 100 people.
Therein lies the sin of silence on the part of the civil rights establishment. Think about it.
posted by Prometheus 6 at 8/1/2003 02:52:19 PM |
Posted by P6 at August 1, 2003 02:52 PM
| Trackback URL: http://www.prometheus6.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1331
