Slavery and bathos at Brown and Yale

LAST SPRING, Yale finally banished a painting of its 17th Century namesake, Elihu Yale, because it depicted him with a dark-skinned servant who wears a shiny metal collar and kneels before him. The overtones had made the portrait toxic in the 1990s, but for 10 years, Yale resisted sporadic demands to remove it from its corporation room, where trustees meet.

Yale was also getting peppered for having dormitory names - Yale calls them "residential colleges"- honoring slave-owning alumni, John Calhoun, the South's famed orator, for one. The agitation stemmed largely from an unofficial history of Yale slavery ties, written by a trio of Yale graduate students in 2001. It had made Yale - rather than the more likely Brown - the North's restive campus in the long drive for reparations for African-Americans.

Yale's president, Richard Levin, felt the North's slavery involvements were "simply a fact of history" in an American past full of embarrassments, and supporters of keeping the names of the residential colleges included key black alumni: Henry Louis Gates Jr., the writer and Harvard's Africana head, who had lived at Calhoun, and former Baltimore Mayor Kurt Schmoke, then head of the Yale Corporation and now law-school dean at Howard University.

Yale kept the tarnished names, and declined to launch its own official search for whatever entanglements exist.

Brown's entanglement was more provocative - its namesake Browns owned slave ships and slaves - yet its campus remained free of agitation, except once and then in reverse order. David Horowitz, a West Coast conservative gadfly, bought an ad in the Brown Daily Herald in March 2001 citing 10 reasons to oppose reparations. A minority coalition, furious when BDH editors declined to apologize or make amends, then confiscated a BDH press run, intensifying the turmoil. The issues of free speech and minority grievances triggered wide national debate.

Click to read more ...

State Lawmaker's Troubles Stalls Recognition of Wilmington White Riot - An Unknown Number of Blacks Killed

It took more than 100 years to bring the race riot of 1898 into the light. Now, the past seems, once again, to be fading.

A package of laws intended to correct the century-old damage, caused by a white supremacist plot to drive blacks from power in Wilmington, has been all but ignored. And the movement's legislative champion, Rep. Thomas Wright, is embroiled in scandal.

"We agonized over this whole process," said Kenny Davis, a member of a commission that spent six years studying the riot. "We came up with recommendations that would improve the quality of life, not only for African Americans, but for everybody in the community. And now they're not being pursued."

Wright, an eight-term legislator from Wilmington, filed 10 bills on the issue when the legislative session started. All but one have failed even to come up for discussion. The remaining bill -- a simple acknowledgment that the incident occurred -- passed the House but faces uncertainty in the Senate.

Some commission members, who worked to uncover what had been one of the state's least-known and darkest episodes, say they are concerned that Wright is no longer effective and that their work may not result in the change they had hoped for.

Click to read more ...

Philadelphia Archaeological dig exposes racist U.S. history - George Washington Kept Nine Slaves at House

Hidden below the modern skyscrapers lay the ruins of Philadelphia’s history—the foundation of a city, and a nation, built and maintained by the labor of enslaved Africans. An excavation near the cracked Liberty Bell is laying bare the history of the first “White House,” where George Washington resided in the 1790s and kept nine enslaved Africans: Oney Judge, Moll, Austin, Hercules, Giles, Paris, Richmond, Christopher Sheels and Joe. It is also providing strong evidence to support the movement for reparations.

The excavation was planned to clear the site in order to lay the foundations for a memorial pavilion to the presidential house and its occupants, including the enslaved Africans. Intended to be completed in time for Philadelphia’s upcoming annual July 4 extravaganza, reaction to the dig may result in a change of plans as many people echo comments of an African-American visitor who murmured, “They should leave this. The truth is finally there to see.”

The first weekend the archaeological dig opened in mid-May, it drew over 1,000 visitors, stunning Park Service officials. A steady stream of visitors gathered on a small elevated viewing platform for the opportunity to see the building outlines and hear archaeologists explain what they were seeing. The tone was almost solemn, the discussions serious about just what role slavery played in the founding of the U.S.

The floor of the kitchen where Washington’s enslaved African chef Hercules toiled is visible. The dig has uncovered new evidence that the kitchen had a cellar and that an underground passageway connected it to the main house.

The outline of a curving neoclassical window that would inspire the current White House Blue Room and Oval Office lies close to the viewing platform. The “important” visitors Washington received in front of this window, however, could not look out onto the quarters of the enslaved Africans. Archaeologists have uncovered the foundation of a wall they believe was built to hide the slaves from public view. Washington was violating a Pennsylvania law that entitled enslaved Africans to freedom after a six-month residency.

One of Philadelphia’s premier tourist attractions, Independence Hall, is visible behind the dig. Other enslaved Africans, who were never compensated for their labor, built Independence Hall.

That Washington and other early U.S. presidents kept slaves in Virginia has never been denied. But when it was discovered about 30 years ago that he also kept enslaved Africans in Philadelphia, the National Park Service buried the discovery. To keep slaves in a free state, Washington exploited a loophole, by periodically swapping his Philadelphia slaves with some of the 316 he kept in Virginia. When some managed to escape, Washington relentlessly hunted them down. [MORE]

Anniversary of Tulsa Race Riot - Black Community Destroyed by White Mob

Four of the remaining 70 or so survivors of mob violence in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on May 31-June 1, 1921 have nightmarish memories:

 Annie Beaird was seven years old. She was wakened by shotgun blasts all around her family’s house. — Kenny Booker was a teenager. He remembers leading his sister through the house in horror as he learned every home on the street was in flames. “Is the world on fire?” his sister asked. “I don’t know,” Booker responded, “but we’re in a heck of a lot of trouble here, baby.” — Beulah Smith, then 14, escaped slaughter by hiding in the family hog pen as truckloads of white men shot black people on sight.

 George Monroe was five years old at the time: “They came in the house with torches, and my mother hid us four wee children under the bed. They set the curtains on fire and, as one guy was leaving, he stepped on my fingers. My little sister slapped her hand over my mouth to keep me from screaming out. That’s what I remember most, my little sister’s hand slapped over my mouth.” The roller rink his father owned was one of the many black-owned businesses destroyed by the mob.

 These survivors were among the lucky. Three hundred others were left dead and their 36-block neighborhood left in smoldering ruins. On the night of May 31, 1921, hatred, fueled perhaps by envy of the perceived economic prosperity of blacks, was unleashed by an armed mob that had gathered at the jailhouse for a lynching. A 19-year-old black man, a shoeshiner named Dick Rowland, had been wrongly accused of trying to rape a 17-year-old white woman, Sarah Page, an elevator operator in a downtown building, the day before. The woman never pressed charges.

Click to read more ...

Immigration and broadening the reparations debate

I want to suggest that we recast the immigration debate, by asking ourselves the following question: what is the price that one country must pay for destroying another country? I know this is not a simple question but it is actually central to the current discussions on immigration and it is something that few people want to actually address.

The facts are these. There are approximately 150 million people who are globally considered migrants. The lion's share of them originates in the Global South (Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean), which were the targets of Western colonialism beginning in the 15th century. To this, of course, should be added the African slave trade and its impact on the Continent, as well as years of further intervention in the internal affairs of formally independent countries in this region by Western Europe and the U.S. beginning in the 19th century.

So, my first point: the economies and social structures of most of the Global South were turned upside down by the West for several hundred years. In this, the U.S. was directly complicit. Looking only at Latin America, for instance, self-determined economic and political development efforts were derailed by the U.S. through a history of what was once called "gunboat diplomacy" (sending in ships and troops), and later by indirect intervention through the propping up of local dictators as well as separate, covert efforts, to overthrow regimes the US frowned upon. If one looks at Central America alone, then, it should be no surprise that refugees from El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua would come north to the U.S. seeking a better life as the U.S. was cooperating in destroying their homes.

Click to read more ...

White Congressman Seeks National Apology for Slavery - 90 House Members Sign Resolution

WASHINGTON -- Germany has apologized for its treatment of Jews in World War II. Australia has apologized to its aborigines. And Tony Blair has apologized to the Irish for Great Britain's handling of the potato famine.

American presidents have come close to apologizing to African-Americans for slavery, and several have spoken of the evil of what some historians call the peculiar institution. Soon, in a measure introduced by U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., -- a white man representing a largely black district -- the United States House of Representatives could finally, formally apologize for slavery, Jim Crow segregation and the continuing legacy of discrimination against black people.

 As of last week, due in part to a strategy devised to appeal more intimately to potential backers of his congressional resolution, Cohen had collected 97 co-sponsors, including Republican Phil English of Pennsylvania.

 In separate letters to members of the Congressional Black Caucus, the Jewish caucus, and to members of the Missouri, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia and New Jersey congressional delegations whose state legislatures have considered, or passed, similar resolutions, Cohen made his appeal.

 "Slavery and Jim Crow laws were able to survive in our country because they were protected by the actions and acquiescence of the United States government, including Congress; we are still fighting their enduring legacies to this day," the letters say.

Click to read more ...

Alabama Legislature Approves Slavery Apology

he Alabama Legislature passed a resolution Thursday expressing "profound regret" for the state's role in slavery and apologizing for slavery's wrongs and lingering effects on the United States.

Alabama is the fourth Southern state to pass a slavery apology, following votes by the legislatures in Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina.

Immediately after the votes in the House and Senate, Alabama Gov. Bob Riley's spokesman, Jeff Emerson, said the Republican governor would keep a commitment he made earlier to sign the resolution as soon as he receives it.

In the Senate, the resolution vote split along party lines, with 20 Democrats in support and eight Republicans in opposition. The House took a voice vote, which provided no record of how anyone voted.

Sen. Hank Sanders, the black Democrat from Selma who guided the resolution through the Senate, said the vote "sends a message that Alabama is finally standing on its history rather than having its history weigh it down."

Click to read more ...

Annapolis Apologizes for Slavery

Annapolis has joined a handful of jurisdictions across the country to officially apologize for its role in the American slave trade.

 The City Council passed a resolution unanimously Monday, with aldermen Michael Christman and Julie Stankivic abstaining.

 Sponsored by aldermen Richard Israel and Sam Shropshire, the measure went through substantial revisions, with the final version, drafted by Israel, expressing "profound regret" and recommending that the last week in October be a week for studying slavery.

 "The citizens can be proud that Annapolis is the first municipal body to apologize for its past support of slavery and segregation," Shropshire said.

 Annapolis was one of the Chesapeake region's earliest slave ports, yet had a large class of free blacks. Slavery was abolished in Maryland in 1864. [MORE]

Moron from Project 21 says Reparations for Slavery is "a Shakedown" - Wants JP Morgan Chase to Withdraw Apology

A shareholder proposal critical of JPMorgan Chase's slavery apology will be considered at the company's annual meeting on Tuesday, May 15, 2007. The event will take place at 10 a.m. at the company's offices at One Chase Manhattan Plaza in New York City.
    The company unsuccessfully sought to exclude the resolution by appealing to the Securities and Exchange Commission, which ruled in favor of the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC), the proponent.
    The resolution will be presented by Deneen Borelli, a Fellow of Project 21[HERE and HERE], on behalf of NLPC. Deneen Borelli said today, "It's absurd for someone to apologize for the transgressions of others committed hundreds of years ago. Slavery was an abomination and blemish on our Nation's history. JPMorgan Chase's apology for slavery, along with a $5 million donation for a scholarship fund, are the fruits of a shakedown. It is the looting of shareholder assets and sets a terrible precedent."
    Peter Flaherty, NLPC President, said today, "If JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon were alive 200 years ago and owned slaves, the apology would be appropriate. Otherwise it is about as cynical and as hollow as you can
get."
    In a 2005 letter, then-Chairman & CEO William B. Harrison Jr. and then- President & COO Jamie Dimon stated, "We apologize to the African-American community, particularly those who are descendants of slaves, and to the rest of the American public..." This apology was accompanied by a Company pledge to establish a $5 million scholarship fund for African-Americans. Dimon now serves as Executive Chairman and CEO.

Click to read more ...

Patient Conyers hopes to move slavery bill during an Obama

After waiting nearly two decades, Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) is well positioned to move legislation that could lead the federal government to apologize for slavery and pay reparations.

But the Judiciary Committee chairman is willing to wait two more years, when he hopes Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) will be in the White House.

In every Congress since 1989, Conyers has introduced the controversial measure that falls under the sole jurisdiction of the Judiciary panel. But the legislation was dormant in the Republican-led House and failed to move through committee when then-Rep. Jack Brooks (D-Texas) headed the Judiciary Committee before the GOP revolution of 1994.

Despite having finally arrived at the head of the powerful committee, the 77-year-old Conyers is prepared to wait yet longer and is biding his time.

Conyers noted that his bill calls for the president to appoint three members to a seven-member commission to analyze the effects of slavery. The House Speaker would make three appointments, while the president pro tempore of the Senate would tap one member.

Even if he had the votes to make his bill law - a big if - Conyers does not want President Bush's appointees to have a role on such a panel.

The Michigan lawmaker, who has strongly backed Obama for president, said he has not called on the senator to endorse his measure. "I don't want to put him on the spot," Conyers told The Hill.

Click to read more ...