Housing Projects:Human Experiments on Black Self Destruction

In 2004, white people looked back on the history of western psychology and proposed a list of “Forty Studies that Changed Psychology.” Joined by papers from freud, pavlov, milgram and skinner, calhoun’s “Population Density and Social Pathology” (1962) captured the white imagination with hundreds of citations and many references in pop culture including novels, comic books and films. It’s impact on Black life is unquestionable; yet despite its Black impact or white popularity, you’d be hard pressed to find a Black person cognizant of its content. Fortunately, the reading man is a ready man, and not only can a reader find the research, a reader can even find several summaries:

[Observations made of rats which were supplied with unlimited food but limited space {in high-rises no less} showed that:] Dominant males became aggressive, some moving in groups, attacking females and the young. Mating behaviors were disrupted. Some became exclusively homosexual. Others became pansexual and hypersexual, attempting to mount any rat they encountered. Mothers neglected their infants, first failing to construct proper nests, and then carelessly abandoning and even attacking their pups. In certain sections of the pens, infant mortality rose as high as 96%, the dead cannibalized by adults. Subordinate animals withdrew psychologically, surviving in a physical sense but at an immense psychological cost. They were the majority in the late phases of growth, existing as a vacant, huddled mass in the centre of the pens. Unable to breed, the population plummeted and did not recover. The crowded rodents had lost the ability to co-exist harmoniously, even after the population numbers once again fell to low levels. At a certain density, they had ceased to act like rats and mice, and the change was permanent.

In essence, the government-funded calhoun correlated population density with social pathologies and since then Black people have been herded into population dense housing projects and riddled with identical social pathologies: street gangs, confused mating, neglectful mothers, child abandonment, high mortality, withdrawn individuals, no harmony, permanent corruption, kwk. The name ‘projects’ isn’t coincidental and its targeting of Black people isn’t accidental. For instance, on the surface, in the united states of america, the Housing Act of 1968 prohibited the use of high-rise developments for families with children (unlikely given how many children are in high-rises today.) The real legislation in that law was Section 235 which gave white people a means to get out and live in the suburbs, effectively leaving Black people behind to the full wrath of the experiments. And it worked. white people lived in the suburbs and Black people lived in the projects. What we know as white-flight is just ‘when the project begins’ and what we know as ‘gentrification’ is ‘when the project ends.’   rats1

Of course, the casual reader may have been mislead into thinking research on rats has no bearing on human beings; however, despite the applicability of the research, the intention of the researcher to apply it to people, the u.s. government funding the research, or the impact of the research on architecture, psychology and science in general–the fact remains that not only do Black people live in ‘Projects’ and white people as early as 1573 correlated dense urban living with ‘rascall and vile sort of men’ (see baret j.); but the more salient fact is that white people have countless studies on Black people and white people control Black environments. Certainly, Black people have a short list of studies on whites, most of which use white studies on white people and few of which are significantly read by Black people; but it’s very similar to the lab rats boldly writing books on their white researchers. Are they truly studying or reiterating? And when they publish with the researchers, is that not more study information for them?

Now, that Black people are studied by whites is undeniable. If you want to learn a fact about Black people, the quickest means is, unfortunately, going to whites. What’s more white people are all very quick on Black facts and statistics; much more so than Black people are of white facts and statistics. However, why white people study Black people isn’t self-evident. I won’t waste much time on conjecture: some will say for sexual accessibility, to financially exploit, to kill us off, to study themselves, because only one Race can be on top, all of the above or none of the above–who knows? The truth is that Black people are in different labs that white people constructed, whether you are in the hood, the prison, the suburbs, the gated community or the white neighborhood. And white people collectively put you there for collective study. What for? Only whites know. What’s more important is for Black people to acquaint themselves with the research and even moreso the smartest solutions out of this predicament.

projects2

For instance, it’s self-evident that if social decay is a result of a lack of space, the solution to the Black problem is emigration. In other words, if the excess rats left the laboratory, the remaining society would have thrived. However, in the rat situation and the Black situation, the whites limited his subject’s individual mobility. The classic example is that Black people wish to move out of the hood all the time; but those who are successful in that transition often find themselves priced out of their destination and returning poorer than ever. Why? Because whether you are in the hood or in the suburbs you are a part of the experiment and if, for instance, the researchers in the suburbs want you back in the hood, he need only make a call and you’re back in room 14. Am I lying?

Further, it’s worth noting that in calhoun’s research, he would observe that the mice became territorial and violent toward one another. But to make it easy for him to verify that the mice were territorial he would mark a handful of mice with different colors. Another scientist then commented that despite how mice are color blind he may have created the territories by assigning different colors, in which calhoun noted that it was possible, especially since the mice could possibly smell the difference between the marks. However, he also lended the idea that although the colors were used on the mice, many mice were uncolored but were as territorial notwithstanding. Anyone in the hood can tell you that different projects (territories/turfs) are represented by different gangs who wear different labels which are oftentimes colors [i.e. neighbors in the same building would rarely be gang rivals]. Not everyone in the building wears the label–but in order for whites to easily study them, many gang affiliates do. Two prominent gang colors — blue and red — have been in Black projects since 1969 and 1972, respectively; very shortly after the 1968 Housing Act and for nearly 50-years! And the flags/bandanas that gangs associate with are manufactured and distributed by, you guessed it, white people–the researchers.

It’s easily said, not so easily done, that Black people should disassociate entirely from territorialism. However, it behooves us to condemn without understanding. In the mice situation, the limit of space also meant the limit of roles; in human terms, the limit of space also means the limit of employment. As in, without predators or diseases, the mice lived longer lives and occupied their social roles longer than nature would permit, so a lot of younger mice would reach the age for social roles and be without any. One impact of this was to destroy the mice’s mating, just the same as an unemployed Black man isn’t as attractive to a Black woman as a gainfully employed Black man or, by design [often and unfortunately], a well-to-do white man. Again, a cursory study of the hood–a prominent project being done to us–is that near every local employable opportunity is taken by eurasians; from the stores we shop down to the police force [The police are not only there to kill us, but also to take our jobs!] The few jobs Black people find in the hood are custodial, transportational and more often than not menial; and many of those employees are aged and not going to give those jobs up. So you have countless young Black people without employment yet under normal circumstances it would not be horrible. For instance, if a hiring factory were nearby, hood employment would be solved [Note to Reader: Build a Black Factory {computers, phones, cars, soap, hair products, frozen foods, kwk}]–or if plentiful arable land was nearby, hood employment would be solved. But there are no hiring factories and not enough arable land near hoods. This is by design.

projects1

Further, the researchers decided to test what impact they can have on Black people if they offered Black people employment as drug dealers and gave them guns, movies, music videos and comic books which reflected how to effectively make a living violently drug dealing. Note: anyone can tell you that Black people do not import drugs into the united states and Black people do not manufacture guns in the united states, but somehow Black people have possession of large quantities of drugs and guns in the united states and its usually the ones with drugs who have the most guns–and those guns are never pointed at the researchers. Anyone can tell you this. It’s easy to suggest Black people should sell their drugs to white people or point their guns at white people; but the experiment is always being perfected. Today, white people mis-educate Black people in schools. They know, in fact, that most Black people only have an 8th-grade education, to this day. They know Black people will drop-off/drop-out in High School because High School is geared toward College and few Black people (particularly males) aren’t intimidated by College when they are being failed left and right. They designed it and we are the lab rats, falling hook-line-and-sinker. In fact, white people know that this article I am writing is above the 8th-grade level so he knows many Black people would not only pass up reading it but will also be unable to grasp fully what is being written. The cracker is laughing. He designed his system to have minimal flaws.

So what in the world can you do? I personally organized a handful of Brothers and Sisters to go into the hoods (where our population is most dense) and endeavor to radicalize the Black population there. Whether it is making them cognizant of the experiments, informing them on how to organize economically, or giving them self-knowledge above and beyond the 8th-grade, that is what I do aside from these writings. And it’s resisted by Black people! It’s thankless work. I’m even resisted by the Black men and women I organized! Only a handful are 100% committed. So the white man sees yours truly, Onitaset Kumat, petitioning certain communities and he’s laughing. The cracker even nods at me. He looks at me and says, without saying, “Nigger, we would have given you any position your Nigger-ass wanted. You individually are smarter than most of us. In another time, we would look up to you, like we looked up to Kmt, Kush, Timbuktu, Olmec, etc. You are a special Nigger, why you wasting your time on those other Niggers?” But personally, I’m just not with abetting the crackers’ agenda. And it’s upon Black readers and leaders to take the same stance. This white man mis-organized Black communities to be self-destructive. Countless Black people, like the lab rats, are turned against themselves while ignoring the impact that the researchers are having. You’ll have your crowd of Black women saying Black men ain’t it; or Black men saying Black women ain’t it; or Black people keeping white secrets (particularly sex secrets–you know who you are! [read “Pieces of a Puzzle: The One Thing Black Females Will Not Talk About” by Reneathia Tate); or Black people serving white people cheaply. But until Black people wake up to the experiments and work toward undoing it, they will be at the mercy of a sadistic and savage people. Black people today are sexually accessible to whites, servile to whites, working for whites, subjugated by whites, mis-educated by whites, mislead by whites, deprived of maturity by whites, reporting all of their information to whites, requiring permission for basic things by whites, being fed and clothed by whites, studied and experimented on by whites; and these white people make sure of it everyday.

Black man and Black woman, you are in a Project. Call it the hood, call it Prison, call it the suburbs, call it a neighborhood, call it Earth, you are in a Project. The solution has always been what it always was: Maroon and Build For Self. I said it for over five-years and ancestors willing, I’ll keep saying it for another one-hundred years. You must break free of white people: then and only then will you be free. Know yourself, know your enemy, and be the rare African who is 100% committed to our liberation. That rare African is our most valuable asset.

Article written by Onitaset Kumat

Elementary Genocide 3: Academic Holocaust

Genocide 3....

This is part three to the Elementary Genocide Documentary series.  It’s a great film by producer Rahiem Shabazz.  I have part one and two.  They were both very educational. And this film looks just as good as the others. The film seeks to explore how the “Murder In The Streets, Same As Intellectual Murder In The Classroom”. The documentary features notables such as Prof. James Small, Kaba Keme, David Banner, Shahrazad Ali, Michael Imhotep and many more. Be sure to purchase it when it comes out.

http://elementarygenocide.com/

Get Out- Interracial/Horror Film(Hidden truths)

get-out-poster

Jordan Peele’s directorial debut Get Out proves a fascinating engagement with the racial truths of the contemporary world. The film centers on interracial couple Chris and Rose who are traveling to meet Rose’s parents in a New York City Suburb.

Prior to their visit, Chris asks Rose if she told her parents that he is black. Rose makes a mockery of this query, a query that encompasses the film’s many acts of foreshadow and dramatic irony. Get Out proceeds to illustrate that it is Chris’ blackness that makes him Rose’s prey. The couple’s visit to meet Rose’s parents proves a sick and calculated effort to abduct black bodies and re-appropriate them as a means to enhance the lives of a white counterpart. In short, the film’s resonance lies not in the images themselves but what lies beneath.

1.White Liberal

One of the most demonstrative illustrations in the film is its portrayal of the “white liberal.” Rose, Chris’s girlfriend not only dates a black man but defends him in the face of overt discrimination. Chris is racially profiled by a police officer on the way to meet Rose’s parents. The policeman asks Chris for his identification, to which they receive Rose’s wrath. After the incident, she states that she won’t let anyone “F%ck with her man.” But little does Chris know, Rose is merely protecting Chris the object and not Chris the person. This objectification becomes clear in the silent auction that takes place in Rose’s parent’s garden. What they disguise as “Bingo” is an auction where interested white buyers place bids for the black body Rose brings home. So questions like “Is it better?” referencing black male sexual performance, is the query of a prospective buyer desiring a worthy investment.

Rose portrays a physical embodiment to the phrase “every shut eye ain’t sleep and every goodbye ain’t gone.” An assumed ally can very well bear oppressive feelings towards a marginalized body. Assumed allies often veil self-interest in seemingly supportive gestures. Namely, Rose does not verbalize her prejudices yet is not any different or better than her parents or their “garden party” guests.

2. The Poisonous Apple

Get Out depicts Chris, a black man,  as an Eve-like figure and Rose, a white woman, as the poisonous apple that exploits his vulnerabilities and renders a series of irreversible consequences. The film intertwines physical hypnosis to induce black acquiescence to a  new identity. Rose acts as a form of hypnosis in her pursuit and pseudo-love for the black male. In seeking to consummate white acceptance and assimilation in his romantic relations with white women,  the black male body enters a vulnerable state exploited by his “prize.” Thus, Rose uses her external appeal to sink her thorns deep into the black male psyche. Just as their love seems to bloom, it is not Rose who dies, but her black lover–illustrating the measure of a rose’s beauty is the ability to distract admirers from its thorns sinking into their flesh.

get-out3

3. Science and black experimentation

The Armitage family abducts blacks, hypnotizes them, and uses the black body to improve white quality of life. The procedure leaves a small portion of the black brain but replaces the majority with a white brain. Thus, the black person becomes “a passenger” in his own body. This procedure seems synonymous to the abduction of African bodies and displacing them onto indigenous soil. This displacement renders the black body a passenger in the western experience as each generation proves more distant relationship to their African origins. While the African brain may not be physically extracted, it becomes westernized so that descendants of abducted Africans feel more American than African–making the black body a commuter in their own oppression.

Interestingly, upon first meeting, Chris and Rose disclose that they hit a deer on their way up. In response, Rose’s father remarks that they “did a service” by hitting and ultimately killing the deer. It is this same ideology that prompts the white conservative to seek out black bodies to dismember for their own personal benefit. In their minds, the Armitage family does a service to blacks abducted for their procedure, as their procedure affords the black body a purpose believed to not exist outside of serving whites. Prior to preparing Chris for the procedure, Mr. Armitage asks him “What is your purpose, Chris?” To pose this question prior to their intended procedure suggests that their use of his body incites a purpose otherwise non-existent.

It is this same ideology that prompted white doctors and scientists to use black bodies to test out medical procedures. Henrietta Lacks’ doctor felt entitled to the contents of her vagina, so much so that he did not even consult her next of kin prior to abducting her cells. The pearl-like substances that killed her would acquire purpose in the lives Lacks would come to save following her death. Thus, just as the Armitage family deems the black body purposeful in servicing whites,  Henrietta Lacks’ story similarly illustrates the black body as purposeful solely when appropriated for western motives.

Slavery and the contemporary world implement a similar ideology as the most celebrated black figures: athletes, entertainers, and actresses all serve whites. Thus, the television, radio and even the education system all act as an informal hypnosis implemented as a means to control black bodies and place them on a dead end path to white servitude.

Film Review Get Out

4. The unassumed intellect

Get Out channels Charles Chestnut’s “The Goophered Grapevine” and “Dave’s Neckliss” in illustrating the unassumed intellect in Chris’ TSA friend, Rod Williams. For those unfamiliar with Chestnut or these stories, a prevalent style of Chestnut is to implement a character who due to their vernacular speech prompts most to assume that he is intellectually deficient. The unassumed intellect uses these preconceived notions to his advantage and deceives his “intelligent” counterparts by the story’s conclusion.

Similarly, Williams provides comedic relief to audiences in his delivery. Yet the dramatic irony evokes laughter from some and frustration from others as audiences know that Williams is the sole party in the film that knows the truth. This depiction functions positively, as it evokes a caricatured black image as a means to exploit presumed western conceptualizing of black intellect. In a perfect world, caricatured imaging of blacks would disappear completely. However, it is an act of advancement to include stereotypes in a way that prompts contemplation, or that performs in a way to challenge western predilection for the compartmentalized black body.

The Final Verdict

The most resounding part of the film for me is when the black male body reappropriated as the Artimage grandfather, snaps out of his hypnosis and not only shoots Rose but shoots himself. This depiction illustrates black detachment from a controlled identity as a necessary component to disabling mental enslavement. Furthermore,  blacks not only have to rid themselves from physical obstacles but the part of ourselves that encompasses these harmful ideologies.

My least favorite component of the film was the means in which the hypnotized black body reverts back to semi-consciousness. Although the black body is held hostage by a white brain, it a flash or white light that snaps them back into consciousness. Thus, although it is a black man who physically saves himself from his pending imprisonment–it is a stroke of white light that enables his escape.

Thus, while seemingly a cautionary tale to interracial dating, or to the black body trusting whites in any capacity–the film evokes a white savior in representation rather than form. At surface level, the film seems to evoke the separatist ideology implemented by civil rights leaders like the late Malcolm X. However, the authorship of said movie makes this close reading impossible to take seriously. For this reason, Get Out reminds me a lot of Birth of Nation.

After viewing both Birth of a Nation and Get Out, I left the theater somewhat content. These feelings faded almost instantaneously as I realized that these movies while depicting the complexities of the historical and contemporary black experience can only resonate but so deeply. Namely, both Peele and Parker write and produce movies that should be revolutionary, but are not.

Jordan Peele and Nate Parker both conclude their films in the same manner. Specifically,   Birth of a Nation and Get Out end with all central white characters are murdered by blacks. While fatalities at the hands of blacks substantiate black bestiality, it also functions to depict white bodies as factors that must be eliminated to free blacks from an oppressive state. Like Birth of a Nation, Get Out is authored and directed by a black male married to a white woman. This dynamic casts said black authors as significantly less harmful and least likely to actually eliminate the white demographic because to do so would be to not only murder their wives but the mother of their children. Furthermore, with their interracial unions, the black male writer and director assumes a non-threatening stance in which the murder of fictive white characters seems an artistic choice rather than a means to uplift the black collective.

While the western world attaches a taboo labeling to interracial unions, these unions function favorably to foment white supremacy. The strongest black leaders are strong not because of what they say but because of what they do. Thus, these films are noteworthy, not revolutionary, as it is not enough to implement images that suggest an ideology disconnected from the thought and action of the author.

Writer and producer Jordan Peele also complicates the ability to take Get Out seriously with his comedic background. Thus, his depiction of a white family who abducts blacks and uses their bodies for their own benefit—becomes a well-executed joke rather than reflective of a past and present horror not limited to a New York City suburb.

Article by C.C. Saunders

 

George Lopez: Don’t marry somebody Black!

george-lopez2

It seems that comedian George Lopez has caused quite an uproar recently. Earlier this week he was doing a comedy show in Phoenix,Arizona and offended a woman in the audience.  The controversy started when Lopez was telling a joke.  During the routine Lopez said :

“There are only two rules in a Latino family. Don’t marry somebody black and don’t park in front of our house.”

Apparently there was a biracial woman in the audience that got upset.  From what I hear she was black/Mexican.  And gave Lopez the middle finger.  Then Lopez began to insult her using profanity. Lopez told her:

Sit your f—king a— down! Sit your f—king a— down! I’m talking b—h,” said Lopez, while the audience cheered. “You paid to see a show, sit you’re a– down. You can’t take a joke, then you’re in the wrong motherf—king place. Sit your a— down or get the f—k out of here.”

Why is this shocking to black people?  Don’t we already know many Hispanics don’t like black people?  This goes for many Mexicans,Cubans,Dominicans and Puerto Ricans.  Yeah I know there are blacks in many Latin countries.  But you know who I’m talking about. I’m talking about those European latinos.  These people worship whiteness. They will work with you in the workplace but most don’t like their children marrying black people.  Most of them have a strong anti-black sentiment.  That’s why the mostly Hispanic audience laughed at the joke.  Lopez didn’t say don’t marry a white person.  Why not??  It’s because most the Mexican audience love white people. If you look at Mexicans they look closer to white than black for sure.  But see I have a different take on it.  I’m not upset at him because he only told the truth.  None of these Hispanic groups want their sons or daughters marrying black people. I think most of them hate our dark skin and African(nappy) textured hair.  They see blacks as inferior and don’t want to mix with us.  Some Mexicans even disown their sons and daughters for marrying blacks.  It’s only you brain dead negroes who hate yourself that are offended.  Why do we want to be accepted by those that hate us? Why can’t we love ourselves?  I’m not offended because I already knew this.  I knew black guys in high school that dated Mexican girls.  Some of the guys told me they weren’t allowed in their girlfriend’s house.  Either the Mexican father didn’t approve or the mother.  Sometimes it was both.  Black people need some self love and black pride.  Then you wouldn’t be offended by the jokes from some ugly pizza-faced washed up comedian.  I don’t want mixed babies so I don’t gave a damn if he wants me in his family.  I remember when he had his talk show a few years ago.  He did a DNA test and found out he was 55 % European,41% Native American and 4% African.  I don’t trust most of those DNA tests anyway.  But even if it’s true it shows he is more European than anything else.  So maybe that’s why many of these so-called Latinos hate black people.  They are mostly European so what would you expect?  Being white and anti-black goes hand in hand. I keep trying to tell black people that these “people of color” are extremely anti-black.  Everyone that has some melanin is not your friend.  Don’t be fooled because someone has brown skin.  This goes for Hispanics and brown-skinned Indians as well.. As a side note,I actually met Lopez about fifteen years ago at a mall.  He was there promoting a radio show he used to host.  He really is an ugly looking mestizo in person.

george-lopez

Look at this pic(above) of Lopez.  Dressing in drag???  Not only does he have a problem with black people but I guess he’s an undercover homosexual as well.  These latinos are funny to me.  Lopez says he hates Donald Trump because Trump is a racist towards Mexicans.  Yet Lopez has the same racist attitude towards blacks. Blacks haven’t done anything to Mexicans.  We never had a war with them.  We never had them as slaves or colonized their land.  So why do they hate us?  Why do all these racial groups hate on black people? Sounds kind of hypocritical to me.  Maybe it’s just racial pride.   Some people want to preserve their race and culture.  I can respect that since I’m the same way. I love being black and I love my African culture. I don’t want to mix with them anyway. But I just don’t like the fact that all these races use black people as a punching bag.  Everyone likes to shit on us!  And I’m really getting tired of it.  Trump wants to build a wall to keep the Mexicans out.  I used to be against this idea.  Now it’s starting to sound like a good idea.  The only problem I have with the wall is I keep asking myself…is it to keep the Mexicans out?  Or to keep us in?  Anyway let me know your thoughts on Lopez. Was he right?  Were you offended?  Or was racism expressed by Hispanics something you already knew?

2017 Women’s March: Black Female Perspective

trump2

Following Trump’s inauguration a series of Women’s Marches occurred throughout North America. The protests erupted to preserve the female liberties seemingly threatened by a “conservative” president who boasted of sexually assaulting women. As a female, I empathize and even support the initiatives that foment this March. However, although a woman, I know that I am inevitably black first. Thus, I can’t help but feel that by supporting the women’s march is to support the very means of my oppression.

On my a tri-weekly journey to a previous job, I recall seeing a number of protestors outside of Planned Parenthood at the wee hours of the morning seeking to shame female patrons. One protestor stood out from the others—an elderly white man surely north of seventy-five. He stood hunched over, holding an oaktag with a message written in ballpoint pen. I did not bother to read the poster, but judging by the stoic expression on his face, he was there to cast the stones of white male privilege onto the female body. Standing at the intersectionality of race and gender, the black woman knows this gaze all to well. While the literal gaze casts itself onto the black female body countless places throughout North America, the figurative gaze consumes black femininity in its entirety. The women’s march solely speaks to the “woman” component of this gaze, eliminating the most defining characteristic of black female identity.

Reproductive rights in general proves controversial to  the black female trajectory. A quick glance at history reveals that the black female endured sheer deprivation in terms of reproductive rights—her body used as means for mayoral economic franchisement. White women too encompassed an existence that also regarded them as property, however their fair skin warranted privileges denied to the black female body. These exclusive liberties afforded to white women illustrate the concept of “woman” as a privilege solely applicable to non-male whites. Consider the phrasing “black” woman. The label “Black woman” illustrates that black female intersectionality separates black females from the term’s initial meaning. For any “woman” of another marginalized faction, their race or ethnicity always precedes the term woman—proving their genitals deem them female but their race and ethnicity is first and foremost. Femininity is also a privilege extended exclusively to non-male whites. This exclusivity persists as the black female body only earns femininity when adopting western aesthetics and behavior.

Given the exclusivity of the term “woman,” I find it quite disturbing that white women ( and other oppressed groups) call on the black women for support in their times of distress, yet alienate the black female body when their children, brothers and fathers lay slain on the streets or untagged in the morgue. How many white women “said her name” after Sandra Bland was murdered? How many white women were overtly outraged after the Trayvon Martin verdict was rendered?

trump1

To take a trip down memory lane, how many white female feminists supported Tawana Brawley in her 1988 trial? If autonomy over the female body is right every woman deserves- why was their no feminist congregation when this young, black girl was sexually assaulted by a number of white men? The answer is simple.  Issues that engage both blackness and femininity become “black” issues instantaneously. This fact reveals that feminism is simply not built to encompass intersectional identities and thereby is not equipped to extinguish black female disenfranchisement.

It seems that former President Barack Obama’s victory disgruntled feminists, who supported this victory as long as it was a symbol of the feminist victory to follow.  It seems feminists felt that history would repeat itself. Namely, black male voting privilege preceded white female voting liberties.  Thus, feminists deemed Clinton’s victory inevitable following Obama’s 2008 victory. Dr. Angela Davis expressed a similar sentiment in the following excerpt from her book Women, Race and Class,

“The representative women of the nation have done their uttermost for the last thirty years to secure freedom for the negro; and as long as he was lowest in the scale of being, we were willing to press his claims, but now, as the celestial gate to civil rights is sIowly moving on its hinges, it becomes a serious question whether we had better stand aside and see ‘Sambo’ walk into the kingdom first.” (Davis 70)

Now that it seems that the black collective has something that the white female collective does not, the bells of white privilege right loudly under the veil of feminism.

Feminism functions to afford white women the same liberties as white men. The main component of these liberties is racism—deeming black female participation in any feminist activity injurious. Thus, to participate in a woman’s march as a black woman is to   march along to the stagnant beat of white supremacy. For the black woman is a queen, but to the western world she will never truly be  a woman.

Article written by C.C. Saunders