5A
OPINIONS/1E)t Ctarlottt $ot
Thursday, September 29, 2005
Two-party politics
i and the loss of
\ political courage
[ Has the emergence of strong two-party politics robbed
North Carolina of the wellspring of political coiirage that set
the state apart in the 20th century?
Retire director of the Institute of Government John
Sanders got me thinking about this question the other day
Sanders said that he was worried that partisan politics
might keep today’s North Carolina govern
ment from taking the kind of bold, progres
sive actions that pushed the state ahead dur
ing the last century
Several years ago in this column I made a
list of 20th Century “defining events” in
North Carolina history
Several of the events that made my list
involved the assumption by the central state
government of additional responsibilities.
Bold action by the governor and the le^sla-
ture were necessary in each case.
1. The creation of the State Highway Commission in 1921
under “Good Roads” Governor Cameron Morrison. Under
Morrison’s leadership the legislature took over responsibili
ty for county roads systems and authorized $50 million in
bonded indebtedness to finance construction of new high-
ways. Walter Tbmer’s recent ‘Taving Tbbacco Road” tells
this story in detail.
2. In 1931 during the administration of Governor O. Max
Gardner, the consolidation of the campuses of North
Carolina State, Women’s College, and the University of
North Carolina under one governing board and president,
leading ultimately to the unified administration of aU public
hi^er education imder the UNC system beginning in 1971.
3. Also during the administration of Governor Gamer, the
state’s assumed primary responsibility for the funding of
public schools with the passage of the “School Machinery
Act” in 1931. Before this reorganization, virtually all fund
ing for public schools came fix)m local sources.
4. The state’s Community College System began in 1957
under Governor Luther Hodges with the passage of
Community College Act and the appropriation of funds for a
statewide system of industrial education centers.
Looking back at these initiatives, it is easy to see how crit
ical they were to North Carolina’s progress. But at the time
they were adopted, they were radical departures fixjm set
tled ways of doing the public’s business-and they involved
substantial new financial commitments for state govern
ment.
John Sanders has me worried whether any of the initia
tives have gotten off the ground in today’s political environ
ment.
During most of the last century. Democratic control of state
government was a given. Althqu^ there were plenty of dif
fering opinions, tha:e was no solid, organized, automatic
opposition group.
John Sanders’ comments to me suggested that such “bold”
initiatives were possible, in part, because the Ncrih Carolina
governor and legislators were not involved in constant parti
san bdckering-and they did not have to worry about losing
control of state government to an opposing political party
Bold initiatives cost money as well as overturning estab
lished ways of doing things. Nowadays, any proposal.to
spaid a substantial sum of money for any initiative is prob
ably dead in the water. When the Democrats have a slim
msgority, as they do in the current General Assembly, they
know that any increase in taxes, no matter how meritorious
the purpose, could lead to the defeat of enou^ of their legis
lators to mean the turnover of power to the other side.
When the Republicans have a majority and take control,
the “no tax increase” pledge taken by most of their legislators
makes it impossible to address any state challenge that
involves significant increases in resources.
If two-party competition did not have the state in a “no
response” bind, what are the challenges that a forward-look
ing govemcHT and legislature might feel compelled to face?
There is no shortage of possibilities. Hirst of aU, the
Leandro case requires that the state face up to the constitu
tional mandate to provide sound public school educational
opportunities throughout the state. Meeting this require- *
ment would mean a reaffirmation of the state’s 1931 com-
mitment-and significant increased expenditures.
Others would point out the ‘last chance” for the state to
protect a sizeable amount of undeveloped land to protect
water qioality and the environment.
D.G. MARTIN is the host ofUNC-TV's North Carolina Bookwalch,
which airs on Sundays at 5 pm.
Connect with
Send letters to The Charlotte
Post, P.O. Box 30144 Charlotte,
NC 28230 or e-mail
editorial{?lthecharlottepost. com.
We edit for grammar, clarity and
space where necessary Include
your name and daytime phone
number.
Angela
Lindsay
Government critics
find voice and favor
After enli^tening the uninformed masses about the horrors of
the diamond trade in Sierra Leone, hip hop’s peddler of socio-polit
ical prose, rapper Kanye West, is at it again. His message this time
aroimd was aimed at none other than our commander-in chief
During a I’ecent telethon to* raise money for the victims of
Hurricane Katrina which aired on NBC, West took his few
moments of airtime to air out exactly what he feels Bush’s senti
ments are toward black people, and I quote: “George Bush doesn’t
care about black people.”
Time and place for everything
Soon after those comments. West was booed by a crowd during
his performance as part of a nationally televised music event right
before the first game of the NFL season at Gillette Stadium in
Foxborough, Mass. West’s performance was tele
cast via satellite fix)m his live performance in Los
Angeles. As the boos ensued, the network did not
show the crowd’s reaction, opting instead to cut to
the L.A. shots. The following week, a conservative
talk show host spun the crowd’s response and the
network’s broadcast decision as an indication that
American citizens stiH support Bush and abhor
anyone who speaks out against him. It is true
Bush has his supporters. There is no shortage of
‘W” bimiper stickers on cars. But the talk show
host seemingly failed to incorporate into his argument the time,
place, and type of audience present.
Had West been performing at The Apollo Theater in Harlem that
night or perhaps at a liberal arts university on the West Coast, it
is likely the reaction of the crowd would have been decidedly dif
ferent. Though times are changing, the vast majority of Afiican
Americans and a good percentage of the MTV generation stiU align
themselves with the Democratic Party Many in this demographic
are also in West’s established fan base and blamed the slow
response to Katrina on fact that most of the evacuees were poor
blacks. As a result, his statement embraced what many of them
may already have been feeling. But this was not the crowd at
Gillette Stadiiun that night, so it follows that West would not nec
essarily receive a resounding measure of applause and cheers
there.
Celebrities often suffer consequences when it comes to what they
say and do, particularly if they are popular at the moment and
especially if they have corporate endorsements. Along the same
lines as West, the country music group, the Dude Chicks, faced
extreme antagonism fix>m their fans when in 2003 lead singer
Natalie Maines announced at a concert; “Just so you know, we’re
ashamed the president of the United States is fix)m Tfexas. This
remark sent their country fans into a fi^nzy of opposition, prompt
ing some to even hold bonfires to bum their CDs. It was clearly a
sign that their Heartland fan base viewed the remark as a betray
al, especially given that the Dixie Chicks and Bush are all Tbxas
natives.
As West’s comments reverberated throughout the news media,
responses ranged from vehement disagreement to enthusiastic
support. His impassioned ad lib tugged at the American people.
Whether that tugging was at someone’s heartstrings or someone’s
last nerve depends on who that someone is. Some felt his choice of
words and platform was inappropriate. Some felt West was
extremely candid and sincere. Others felt it was a ploy to boost his
record sales. Either way, his image was catapulted, and it has not
hurt him financially
Corporate cash cow
Besides loss of fan loyalty, celebrities sometime stand to lose a lot
more for their behavior. Last week I received an email encourag
ing a boycott of Pepsi products claiming that the cola and snack
maker had dropped West as their spokesperson. Pepsi has denied
the i*umor. That’s good news for West’s bank account. But it’s a bit
inconsistent considering rapper Ludacris lost his endorsement
deal with Pepsi after Bfil O’Reilly, host of “The O’Reilly Factor”
talk show, encouraged his viewers to “punish” Pepsi products due
to Ludacris’ streetwise and sometimes sexually imaginative lyrics.
But Pepsi’s decision to retain West may not be so odd after all, con
sidering that the week following West’s comments, his album was
No. 1 and his current sin^e “Golddigger” is in heavy radio rotation
and has been sitting atop the charts for weeks.
Sponsors can easily see the benefit in keeping someone like West,
who is already an established artist in the urban sector and has
enormous crossover potential, on their rx)ster. His newfound
infamy and boost in irecognition in the mainstream can be appeal
ing for those sponsors looking to seem more youthful and edgy and
can be a surefire way to lure the lucrative young, urban market to
their product.
The fact that West can walk the ti^trope among the fickle pub
lic as someone with “street credibility” and a person with an appre
ciable measure of intellectual depth make him an ideal marketing
tool for the moment and perhaps underscores the notion that con
troversy sells. And thou^ network execs were reportedly outraged
at West’s remarks, he has been a part of several other fund raisers
and live televised events since, which also flies in the face of the
worry over FCC compliance since Super Bowl XXXVUI’s
peepshow.
Whatever a person’s beliefs, I applaud anyone with the nerve to
express them publicly considering the inevitable backlash that
usually rames with it. This time it seems the notion of fise speech
is paying off. literally and figuratively What will happen the next
time remains to be seen.
E-mail ANGEIA LINDSAY at UndsaylawOOt^yahoorom.
Gyasi a.
Foluke
Katrina challenge:
Jefferson’s ghost
The Hurricane Katrina disaster along the Gulf
Coast, once again, has revealed via television, the bla
tant hypocrisy and goodness of America on the issue
of ethnicity (“race”) and/or class.
And yes, Katrina DID ‘bring out the worst and best
in us” in response to this still ongoing emei'gency, for
thousands of people, across ethnic Unes and perhaps
in an unprecedented manner, poured out theii* hearts
and money to those unfortunate victims of “Mother
Nature,” while providing a scintilla of hope that, one
day, truly, we could become “one nation.” Indeed,
many commentators, both national
and international, not only expressed
sympathy for Katiina evacuees, but.
some of them also expressed the
“shame” that they and others felt
about despicable conditions, involv
ing both race and class that- were
exposed by this large natural disas
ter
The above factors notwithstanding,
let us be informed or reminded that
this micro-disaster or national “shame” simply pales
in comparison to a more protracted, man-made,
macro-disaster of nearly 400 years in America, aptly
described as The Real-Holocaust (1995), the title of
my first book, where a minimum, guesstimated 300
million Afiican people, “at home and abroad,” have
been killed by terrorism. And this man-made “racial”
disaster also has been caused, in part, by “The Ghost
of Thomas Jefferson.” For this “^ost” is none other
than the well-known, immoral, hypocritical, repeti
tive, double-standard phenomenon of white racism
and its multiple corollaiies, including “kneegroism,”
that has permeated American society both before and
after the Jeffersonian era. More germane, Jefferson
believed that “the two races could never live peace
ably side by side;” for the “deep-rooted prejudices
entertained by the whites,” as well as the “ten thou
sand recollections, by the blacks, of the iryuries they
have sustained...will divide us into parties, and pro
duce convulsions, which will never end but in the
extermination of our or the other race.” Wow! What
an ugly prognosis-providing us with a spiritually
beautiful challenge that we have yet to embrace.
Alas and clearly, Jefferson was the “classic” or quin
tessential White racist, reflecting “spiritual wicked
ness in high places.” (Ephesians 6:12, the Holy Bible)
For he opposed the barbaric-terrorist institution of
chattel slavery, both verbally and in writing, simulta
neously holding many Blacks in bondage. However,
in his WiH, perhaps in belated response to his con
science, he mandated physical “fi*eedom” for those
whom he had enslaved—BUT without compensation
or reparations, with exception of a few of his “faithful
servants.” And this latter group, are best described
today, in 2005, as “kneegroes,” those who are content
to exist, metaphorically, on their knees, as they con
tinue to serve “massa” faithfully For they fail to chal
lenge the present racist-plantation system, while
“selling their souls” for those rewards or token
awards that accrue to them personally, in contrast to
the liberation of their ethnic group—mentally, eco
nomically culturally, and politically—most often imi
tating “massa,” displaying self-centered greed and
ignorance, par excellence. Therefore, Jefferson and
millions of others who embracefd) his “ghost nature,”
are guilty of “speaking out of both sides of their
mouths” or with “forked tongues” as described by
Native Americans.
Tb reiterate, Katrina exposed such “forked tongue”
behavior-like “liberty and justice for all”-when, in
fact, it was mostly poor Blacks who were entrapped,
conspicuously in New Orleans-as they are in most
areas of America—those who did not own automo
biles and could not escape like their richer or middle-
class fellow citizens. Indeed, under President George
Bush, reportedly, there has been a 17 percent
increase in poverty, traceable in great measure, to
morally bankrupt public policies, like notorious tax
cuts for the rich (the raison d’etre-reason for being-
for “conservatives”), proposed cuts in poverty pro
grams like Medicaid, and of course, that major
aggression-disaster in Iraq, initiated based upon a
series of lies that, tragically, were promoted publicly
by modern-day “faithful servants,” like C^neral Colin
Powell and Dr. Condoleezza Rice. Therefore, the
“shame” of Katrina far transcends official mistakes in
disaster planning or bureaucratic ineptitude and
should be perceived in a much larger context of a
national failure to address The Real-Holocaust-to
provide compensation and/or reparations to victims of
this more protracted disaster.
GYASI A. FOLUKE, MA., DD. is part CEO of The Kushite
Institute for Wholistic Development and author of several
books