I Hate the Difference Between "Jews" and "blacks".

Today, I'm reading about reading about James W. von Brun (shot a guard at the Holocaust Museum) in an article co-written by Darryl Fears of the Washington Post (with whom I am acquainted because of an article he wrote for which he interviewed me and James Rucker of Color of Change) and a couple things come to my mind:

Darrly Fears says of von Brun,

He was smart enough to join Mensa, but even admirers considered him a loner, a hothead and a man consumed with hatred. A Suspect's Long History of Hate and the Signs of Strain.

I wonder if reporters will write that about me someday, since I've recently taken to referring to abusive and murderous police officers as "pigs" at my Police Brutality Blog. (I don't call them "pigs" because of their skin color, since all too many Black police officers are "pigs" as well. I call police "the pigs" regardless of their skin color, when they abuse their badges and blue uniforms, and exercise their role in American society, of oppressing particularly those who are not white in the United States, including Blacks and Latinos.

As they sang back in West Side Story,

"Life is all right in America, if you're all white in America."

Things are NOT alright for a lot of whites in America today, but they are considerably MORE alright when whites are dealing with the police, prosecutors, judges and all-white juries.

Because of my role in founding the AfroSpear and my activism in the afrosphere, no one will call me a "loner". But they might say I am consumed with hatred. Look at this paragraph from the Washington Post article about James W. von Brun:

"Von Brunn is obsessed with Jewish people," Blodgett said. "He had equal contempt for both Jews and blacks, but if he had to pick one group to wipe out, he'd always say it would be Jews."

I hate that paragraph. I read it and wonder, why does the Washington Post have a policy to capitalize the words "Jews" and "Jewish", but not the words "black" and "blacks"? Aren't we both ethnic groups with an overall common identity, history, political position, and voting patterns?

I would argue that Blacks are MORE of a cohesive voting group that Jews, as voters, because of our overwhelming and steadfast support for Democratic Party candidates against Republicans. (Look at the degree to which we supported Barack Obama over John McCain and Bill Clinton over George H. W. Bush. Our voting patterns were far more group-cohesive than those of Jews in those elections).

Obviously, the Washington Post is referring to an ethnic group above when they use the word "Jews" and also when the use the word "blacks".  (The Human Genome Project has proved that ethnic groups do not exist as a matter of DNA science, so the term refers to a social and political construct.)  So what, aside from color-aroused antipathy, can explain that the Washington Post chooses to capitalize the words "Jews" and "Jewish," but not "Black" and "Blacks?" Can anyone explain the difference to me?

Certainly, the WaPost could have used the term African American, but James von Brun undoubtedly emoted color-aroused hatred toward Black people regardless of what country we are from. And so the term "African American" in that context would obscure a truth rather than clarify one.

I hate the above paragraph because of the color-aroused antipathy the Washington Post expresses when it makes an editorial judgment that it will NEVER capitalize the word "black", even if the write the phrase "black is beautiful". Do they think we're talking merely about a skin color when we say "Black is beautiful"? But most people who are "Black" do not have black skin; we have brown and beige and even red clay colored skin. "When we say "Black is beautiful", we are referring to the culture of an ethnic group and its peoples, with African heritage.

(All human beings originated in Africa, including the whites ones, as we all know today, so even white people have attenuated African heritage. So, when we say "African-Americans", we're referring to the ones who came from Africa over the last 500 years, while excluding those who came from Africa and underwent genetic mutations that made their skin white over the last two million years.)

It's pointless to say that Jews (or Blacks, for that matter) are a distinct "racial" group, since the Human Genome Project has concluded, based on DNA studies, that "race" does not exist. And if "race" is a social construct and that's why the word "Jews" is capitalized, then obviously "Blacks" should be capitalized as well, since (as I pointed out above) most Blacks do not actually have black skin. For example, look at the photograph of me above and compare it to the color of this typeface. If you believe that my skin "black" (even when comparing  my skin color to an Internet color chart),then you have color-aroused perception of skin colors.

It is likewise pointless and insulting to say that the words "Jews" and "Palestinians" are capitalized but not "blacks" because Jews and Palestinians come from an identifiable geographic location. I think everyone knows that Blacks came from Africa over the last 500 years, but we are called "Blacks", as a group, because many of us were not born in Africa, have no personal experience with Africa, but are united as Blacks internationally, as a group, principally by the way that we have been treated by whites, by our reponses to that treatment, as well as because of some African cultural features and preferences that amazingly survived or were created by the way we have been treated by whites over the last 500 years.  Nonetheless, we are a distinct identity group, or the Washington Post would not refer to us as "blacks".

In summary, Blacks are an ethnic group as much as Latinos and Jews because of how whites and Blacks have determined our cohesive role in society. To fail to capitalize the word "Black" is to show amazing color-aroused antipathy toward Blacks and to invite the hate of Blacks. In my mind, this failure alone to capitalize the word "Black" should make individual whites afraid to meet Blacks on a dark street corner.

Whites who steadfastly refuse to capitalize the ethnic group name "Black" are whites who deserve a beating.

 *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Human Genome Project Disproves
Centuries-Old Concept of "Race"

According to the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, Human Genome Program:

"DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans. While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another. There also is no genetic basis for divisions of human ethnicity. People who have lived in the same geographic region for many generations may have some alleles in common, but no allele will be found in all members of one population and in no members of any other."

In other words, the Human Genome Project has proven that, as a matter of scientific fact, that which we call "race" does not exist as a matter of biology, and so all references to "race" are references to a fallacy.

Francis L. Holland in the Mainstream Media:

Washington Post quotes
Francis L. Holland slamming DNCC for all-white state blogs corps:

"Francis L. Holland, one of the vocal black bloggers, sent e-mails to DNC officials asking that 15 black-operated blogs be added to the State Corps. "There is nothing 'Democratic' about an all-white Democratic National Convention floor blogging corps," he wrote in an e-mail. Holland is also asking for the inclusion of 15 Latino-operated blogs."

Slate.com quotes Francis L. Holland regarding John Edwards' decision to endorse Senator Barack Obama for President:

"Or, as Obama supporter Francis L. Holland puts it: "So, it shows tremendous courage, foresight and solidarity that Edwards has endorsed Obama after the media declared Hillary's campaign to be as good as dead, right? Oh, well! Better late than never!"

BlackEnterprise.Com quotes Francis L. Holland:

"Of the blogs covering the convention, black blogs will be 7.2% of the blogs present,” says Francis L. Holland of the Afrosphere Action Coalition. According to Holland, many states with a strong black Democratic presence and population are either underrepresented or not represented at all, even though black bloggers from these states did apply. “The state of Tennessee, which often has over 25% blacks among its Democratic primary voters, will not have a single black blogger at the Democratic National Convention, for example. The District of Columbia, which is 60% black, will be left out. Louisiana, which is 32.4% black, will be left out. Illinois, the presidential nominee’s home state, which is 15% black, will be left out.”

Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism cites Francis L. Holland:

In 2008, the Democratic "party came under fire from African American bloggers. Francis L. Holland of the Afrosphere Action Coalition, complained to Black Enterprise magazine that black blogs only made up slightly more than 7% of the bloggers credentialed for the convention."

Francis L. Holland Blog in the
Washington Post:

"We are tired of Hillary Clinton telling America that we are less than American simply because we refuse to vote for her," said Francis L. Holland, an African American blogger." Ironically, the Clintons embraced us, and even embraced Pastor Jeremiah Wright for support during their impeachment scandal." Holland was speaking of the congressional trial that followed former president Bill Clinton's liaison with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. "She has forfeited the black vote for the foreseeable future with her color aroused appeals."

Francis L. Holland Blog in Dallas Morning News:

“November’s voter turnout depends on August’s blogger outreach,” said Mr. Holland of the Afrosphere Action Coalition., a member of a national and international black bloggers’ coalition called “The AfroSpear.” “Blogs address constituencies, and it simply is not possible for blogs that are all-white to effectively reach diverse Democratic constituencies.”

Francis L. Holland Blog in Black Enterprise Magazine:

"Of the blogs covering the convention, black blogs will be 7.2% of the blogs present," says Francis L. Holland of the Afrosphere Action Coalition. According to Holland, many states with a strong black Democratic presence and population are either underrepresented or not represented at all, even though black bloggers from these states did apply. “The state of Tennessee, which often has over 25% blacks among its Democratic primary voters, will not have a single black blogger at the Democratic National Convention, for example. The District of Columbia, which is 60% black, will be left out. Louisiana, which is 32.4% black, will be left out. Illinois, the presidential nominee's home state, which is 15% black, will be left out."

Pacifica Radio's Election Unspun June 23: Black Bloggers and Black Power, interviews Francis L. Holland:

"Francis Holland is a blogger from Afrospear, a national group of bloggers that advocates for African-Americans. When he looked at the list of State Bloggers, he saw no black blogs among them. Holland explains that the process the Democratic Convention planners used to choose the State Blogger Corps was bound to lead to this result. And he argues that the Democratic Party can scarcely afford to alienate black voters in this election year." (The original link no longer works, which is becoming a growing documentation problem on the Internet.)

The American Prospect quoted Francis L. Holland explaining why Blacks and women would not support John Edwards in 2008:

"Electing Edwards to challenge the status quo is like supporting a queen to challenge the monarchy or integrating an all-white club by adding more all-white club members. It is possible that electing yet another white man to the Presidency will end the poverty of the historically disenfranchised, with John Edwards serving as a "pass through" for those who have historically been disincluded legally and by custom. But this is a very convoluted way of achieving what could be achieved much more directly by electing Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. ..."

Huffington Post published Francis L. Holland's articles.