PBT 8/18/19: Jay-Z, Capehart & Sheila Jackson Lee Attack Black Empowerment Professor Black Truth
First off, let me say that I love this movement and I applaud all the work that has been done to create the Black Agenda that appears on the website ados101.com. I understand that it is a framework, and as such, it is subject to future changes.
Allow me to add some edits of my own.
Now I am not a scholar (and do not pretend to be one), but I am intelligent enough to be able to speak somewhat on a variety of subjects, this being one of them. I’ve been on a roller coaster ride of opinions about reparations for much of my life, from feeling as though it’s impossible to Black people not needing them to my present-day feeling that yes, an atonement is necessary and required for the existence of slavery in America.
Most of what forms my feelings about the posted Black Agenda is that they are not going far enough in what should be doled out in the form of reparations. My two beliefs are:
Those two points will form the basis of the opinions I have on the Black Agenda posted on ados101.com, which I will discuss point-by-point below:
I have no issues with this. We can use what is on past census forms (although I thought they were supposed to be anonymous… am I wrong?) to help determine eligibility for reparations.
Again, I have no issues with this. This should have been the required implementation anyway that should NOT have been co-opted by other groups.
I have no issues with this either. (but don’t worry, my co-signing will soon come to an end, lol)
I DO have an issue with this. Either one of two things should happen:
I do not believe this should be included, because this should happen ANYWAY. ADOS communities developed AFTER slavery, as slaves did not form their own communities. As such, this issue is more a result of segregation than slavery, and thus should be separated.
Again, see my beliefs in Point 5. This is a given that shouldn’t be tied to slavery.
Again, see my beliefs in Point 5. This is a given that shouldn’t be tied to slavery, and I don’t believe this goes far enough:
I wholesale do NOT support this. In a time when HBCUs have allowed non-black and transgender individuals come into their ranks, this allows non-ADOS individuals to claim benefits not meant for them. In addition, HBCUs were formed in part because black people were not allowed to be educated in white-only institutions.
If anything, this should be flipped.
These institutions should be forced to set aside 20% of their incoming student populations specifically for ADOS applicants, AND fund at minimum 50% of their tuition, and ALL of their room/board, books, meal plans, AND any and all associated fees that students are expected to pay.
HBCUs should also be audited to ensure they are doing everything that is in the best interest of the STUDENTS. Issues should as this that happened at Clark Atlanta University should never be allowed to happen, else that university be placed on probationary status immediately, and not to end before a period of 1 year. If issues are not corrected, they lose access to all federal monies that fund student loans.
This is not tied to slavery at all, and affects more than just ADOS designees. A problem, yes, but this can be raised during the political season.
Slaves never got loans, let alone access to any kind of bank, so this is a waste of time trying to pursue and trying to tie it to slavery. I feel as though it’s tied more to segregation, and maybe should be part of the Civil Rights Act more so a discussion about reparations.
I can agree with this, as long as that advertising does not also include any support for gay themes or issues. These two things are completely separate, and often gay issues are used to hijack ADOS issues even when ADOS issues are specifically referenced (see Cory Booker). Also, the government should not be used to push a gay agenda (which many believe it is already complicit in doing).
HELL YES. Immediately. Yesterday.
Yes, provided this is separate from all other monies distributed to ADOS recipients. There should be requirements for how this credit is used as well:
I’m kinda torn on this one. Although this is a good step, obviously depending on the government to do anything right has us in the positions that we are in today.
Instead, I believe that proposals should come from the public, with the most commonly supported ideas voted on in some way.
I think the Black Agenda framework has great ideas, but it’s much too light on specifics. It is leaving to much to interpretation and chance, and also asking and hoping more than declaring and demanding (which is the same thing that happened during Obama’s campaign/presidency). Also, since we have seen what the government is capable of in their distribution of funds during the 2008 Great Recession, which included the $700 billion Bank Bailout (aka Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008) and the $80.7 billion Auto Industry Bailout. These entities have been on record for the damaging ways that they have done “business” with ADOS consumers, yet benefits from taxpayer funds, which of course included funds from the same ADOS taxpayers whom they damaged in business. This in effect was like loaning money to a title pawn or pay day lending business, the mob, or a debt collector.
Once the specifics can be ironed out (of course, back with supporting evidence that ados101.com has provided for many of their Black Agenda points), we will be in a much better position to demand what is rightfully owed to us, versus approaching the issue hat-in-hand as if we’re asking for more gruel, sir.
Copyright © 2019 That Angry Man. All Rights Reserved.