The True "Racial Hucksters"

So much for that post-racial America.

 

Anyone hoping for some form of justice, or at least an attempt at justice, after the slaying of 18-year-old Michael Brown was quickly brought back to reality when a Ferguson, Mo., grand jury declined to indict Officer Darren Wilson this week.

 

That the grand jury did not indict was not unexpected. Whenever a police officer kills a civilian, whether that civilian is armed or not, the chances of an indictment are slim to none because all the officer has to say is that he or she felt that his or her life was in danger. Once such a statement is made the officer is given the benefit of the doubt with little done to ascertain if the supposed threat was real and the actions taken justified.

Such was evident from the beginning of the Ferguson case. The St. Louis County Prosecutor, Robert McCulloch, had all but signaled that there would be no indictment. The same was true of many Missouri officials. Legal precedent had already told Americans which way the wind was blowing.

The only way a white cop will be indicted on state charges for shooting an unarmed black male is the circumstances of the case must be so revolting, so egregious that even white America is appalled. Indeed, some white Americans were, especially when they saw the heavily armed police response to protests in the aftermath of Brown’s death.

But a majority of white Americans, or at least those who were given the largest megaphones, saw little wrong with the police tactics either in the slaying or during the post-slaying protests that ensued. To them, a white cop waving an automatic weapon at protestors and calling them animals that he would kill was a reasonable response. That police withheld the identity of the officer for days; that the officer disappeared from public; that anonymous police sources were quoted as saying Wilson was beaten “almost unconscious;” or that he suffered a broken orbital bone did not stir questions about police practices.

No.

The problem as they saw it was the black male.  

And there is the rub.

A white police officer kills an unarmed black teenager and Rudolph Giuliani, the man who was once dubbed “America’s Mayor,” proclaims on “Meet the Press” that the problem is not with police or police-community relations: It is with black people.

“White police officers wouldn’t be there,” Giuliani told the nation and Georgetown professor Michael Eric Dyson, “if you weren’t killing each other.”

He also said: “Ninety-three percent of blacks are killed by other blacks. I would like to see the attention paid to that that you are paying to this.”

“Black people who kill black people go to jail,” Dyson said. “White people who are policemen who kill black people do not go to jail.”

Sometimes the white killer does not have to be a police officer.

An unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was killed by a dime-store vigilante and wannabe hero, and it was Martin whose character was assassinated. Trayvon’s killer walked free after a trial.

 

Yet, the most compelling cases seem to always involve police, who seem to have been conditioned to consider every black man a threat. In describing why he killed Michael Brown, Officer Darren Wilson went to great lengths to describe Brown in hulking and animalistic terms. Brown was Hulk Hogan to Wilson, who said he felt like a 5-year-old in trying to defend himself. Brown made a “grunting, like aggravated sound,” his fist clenched, before charging.   

But black men do not have to exhibit animalistic characteristics to be a threat.

In August, John Crawford, a 22 year old black man, was killed by police while carrying a toy gun in a Wal-Mart in Beavercreek, Ohio.

Recently, 12-year-old Tamir Rice was killed when officers claimed he pulled a toy gun from his waistband in a Cleveland park. According to police, Tamir did not point the gun at police or make any verbal threats. He was shot twice, nonetheless.

In Brooklyn, Akai Gurley was fatally shot by a rookie police officer when Gurley entered the seventh floor landing at the Louis H. Pink Houses. The officer, Peter Liang, his weapon drawn, was on the eighth floor landing. Liang’s weapon, according to Police Commissioner Bill Bratton, discharged accidentally from 11 feet away. The weapon of Liang’s partner was still holstered.

An even more egregious case involved Jonathan Ferrell, a 24-year-old former FAMU athlete, killed in the Charlotte area in 2013. Ferrell had been in a serious traffic accident, and appeared to be seeking help when he was fatally shot for running toward three police officers. One of the officers was charged with voluntary manslaughter, meaning the officer is accused of using excessive force in self-defense.  

The Ferrell case is the rarity where an officer claimed self-defense, but still faces felony charges.

More often, there are no charges, just as there is no clear idea of how many people are killed by police officers every year in America.

According to a Nov. 24 article on The Washington Post web site, 27 police officers were killed in the line of duty in the United States in 2013. That is down from 49 in 2012. Meanwhile, there is no reliable data on how many civilians were killed by police.

The best we know is that America’s 17,000 law-enforcement agencies self-report about 400 “justifiable homicides” per year, according to FBI statistics. Of course, journalists and scholars who study police shootings estimate that as many as 1,000 people are shot and killed by police each year.

Instead of taking that information and using it to ask questions or demand answers, the pundit class – and particularly those who wish to blame black people – decry black activists, saying that those activists are the real issue. Such was the case when Adam Brodsky wrote recently in The New York Post that the real problem with blacks being killed by police are blacks themselves.

According to Brodsky, blacks have failed to take advantage of the opportunities afforded them, instead relying on such “racial hucksters” as the Rev. Al Sharpton. Blacks, Brodsky claimed, need to be more like Jews who do not complain about anti-Semitism. Brodsky does not discuss that Jews have the anti-Defamation League, B’nai Brith, and other organizations that battle anti-Semitism every day.

Of course the more appropriate response would be to ask if there is a problem with local police and the communities they serve, and whether each could work to change the perceptions each has of the other.

 

To do that, of course, would mean that the “racial hucksters” have to be stopped in their tracks, which won’t be done. After all, what would FOX News, conservative politicians, and all those white pundits do if they can’t blame black people and engage in race-baiting.

Not So Lame Duck

After the results of the mid-term elections had been recorded, the 111th Congress seemed poised for a stalemate. Republicans were swaggering about, drunk on election results that saw them gain six seats in the Senate and control of the House of Representatives. Democrats, on the other hand, were licking their wounds; reeling from what President Barack Obama called a shellacking, and pointing fingers at each other.

Now that the 111th Congress has ended, one might wonder if, in some demented way, the rise of the Republicans will prove good for America. Power concentrated in the hands of a few is deadly. When those powerful few are intoxicated with arrogance and their own sense of self-importance it can be devastating. We need only look at the results of the 1994 mid-term elections when the Republicans, led by Newt Gingrich, took over the House of Representatives then quickly acted with utter disregard for what was in the best interest of the country. Arrogance led Gingrich and company to assume that they could do as they wished, including shutting down the Federal Government. It backfired on them.

It appeared that the Democrats, after they took control of the White House, Senate and House of Representatives in the 111th Congress, had not learned any lessons from the Gingrich years. Party leaders acted with impunity, ignoring the seeds of discontent being sowed throughout the country. Democrats argued among themselves, seeking not to lead, but rather to dictate through extremes. As a liberal, I am more than elated that we have a national health-care plan. I am also overjoyed with many of the other legislative initiatives enacted in the last two years. Yet I am also disappointed that others were not completed – a revamping and strengthening of No Child Left Behind, for example – and that some of those initiatives that I cherish were set in motion through arrogance and a disregard for debate.

Democratic control of the 111th Congress reminded me of a conversation I had with a white postal worker in New York City after the 1993 election of Rudolph Giuliani as mayor.

"It's our time," the white postal worker proclaimed. "Now we're in control."

His statement carried the threat of revenge, a sense that it was time for white New York to lash back at the liberal agenda New York City had experienced. Enough with that liberal agenda and its leader, David N. Dinkins, the city's first black mayor, the postal worker argued as we continued to talk. White men had regained their rightful place in New York and they were ready to serve up retribution, he appeared to be saying. In his voice, and in the actions of many, there was a sense of entitlement and self-importance, a sense that now he and his put upon friends could finally put the city's minority population back in its place.

The comments that followed the 2010 mid-term elections carried the same threat. After two years of refusing to work with the current administration in an effort to win back Congress and make Obama a one term president, Republicans swore to continue their march, blocking all legislative action until they got what they wanted – a continuation of the tax cut for the wealthy. They did, indeed, receive what they sought. But at what price?

After the initial bellowing and grandstanding, several Republicans finally stood up and did the right things. The results were not totally to my liking, just as I am sure they were not to yours. But for the first time in many years, Washington seemed to at least be moving toward solutions to the problems that plague us as a nation.

Of course, this is not to absolve the far right of the Republican Party. They were obstructionists for the last two years, and they will seek to be obstructionists for the next two. Nor is it meant to coddle the far left of the Democratic Party, for many of them acted with the same arrogance as Gingrich's GOP majority.

At least, for a few days, we can bask in the sense of accomplishment that permeated Washington for the last few weeks. In doing so, we cannot forget that the afterglow of the lame-duck session of the 111th Congress was created by cross-aisle communication. And with a new year approaching, we should pray that leveler heads will prevail and more legislators will have the gumption to stand up, reach out to their counterparts and say, "Let's fix what we has been broken for too long."