Rethinking Rabbani’s Reality

"Rethinking Rabbani’s Reality"

I have never liked the taste of boiled iced tea. The lack of sweetness is not the problem. Many drinks that I enjoy (water is at the top of the list) are not sweet. No, it is the shocking and lingering bitterness of how many Americans make their iced tea that always stops me in mid-sip.


Oft times, I tried to do the Yankee tea like some of those nasty liquid “medicines” of my childhood: drink it all down so fast that my taste buds have minimal time to object. 
*Neglecting to remember, of course, that the sensory job of my “buds” is an important “warning system.” However, this tactic has had very, very limited success with boiled tea.

Yech!

As I have grown older and spent more time in Texas, I have had more encounters with this unpleasant elixir of the North. These encounters have caused me to realize something about human nature: the more a person has to deal with something that is initially repulsive to him/her, the more he/she becomes accustomed to and tolerant of that repulsive something.

Felix Ungars who have to without bathing for too long become accustomed to, tolerant of (albeit begrudgingly) of the smell.

Men and women who do not love their spouses become, after several years of matrimony, accustomed to, tolerant of sharing with the previously unwanted a bed.

All of this (and much more) is the result of one of the most important aspects of human nature that has been virtually instrumental to our species’ survival after many millennia: resiliency via adaptation.

Indeed, it is the ability to “improvise, adapt, and overcome” that has kept us on this planet thriving to the point where we are about to destroy the planet that, thus far, has not been able to destroy us.

When I was little, my father – who was a police officer in Miami for 13 years before his death – took my brothers and I to peek inside of an empty holding cell at the city’s old police headquarters (the site of which is now a shiny new Winn Dixie). The peek lasted only a few seconds but I remember that it was cold, dark, and frightening. I remember the drop in my chest when the awesome, steely thud of the hatch shutting closed was heard – and I was on the outside. It scared the absolute isht out of me and it still does thirty years later.

The “Scared Straight” documentary of the mid-seventies offered the same thesis: the initial shock of incarceration is enough of a deterrent to prevent the normal human being from committing (or recommitting) any jailable offense in the future.

But what happens when you leave a human being - a resilient and adaptable creature, the most resilient and adaptable creature – behind bars for too long? Won’t they “get used to it”? Won’t prison then become something that no longer serves as a deterrent? If so, then are we trying to punish crime or prevent crime?

Whereas I grew up with the logic that appropriately-executed punishment is meant to prevent crime, the above rationale presents them, not as steps in the same process, but as completely different, almost adversarial processes.

Mumia Abu-Jamal asks “why do we call it ‘corrections’?”

I think of the accounts of men and women who spent so much time – too much time – in a “correctional setting” that they became so accustomed – too accustomed – to prison “life” that they were unable to exist in a normal setting outside of jail. Sadly for them, the prison stopped being shocking and, instead, became a normal setting.

I spent years training and licensing foster parents in Miami using, as our primary training tool, the state-required Model Approach to Partnerships in Parenting curriculum (designed and copyrighted by the Child Welfare Institute in Atlanta). Of the ten “meetings” we conducted for the training of prospective foster, adoptive, and shelter parents, the most popular was meeting number five. This particular meeting’s focus was discipline.

Among the many vital points we covered during this mandatory meeting were (A) the true definition of the “discipline,” (B) proper execution of different behavior modifications, and (C) why certain “punishments” (behavioral “interventions”) that were “fine” and “okay” for “normal, well-adjusted “ people were not appropriate for people with histories of abuse, abandonment, and neglect.

According to the MAPP curriculum, “discipline” is defined as the method to teach a human being how to conduct him/herself in a manner that is socially-appropriate, in a way that will not cause the individual to alienate him/herself from his/her peers. 

There is no mention of “punishment” in the definition of discipline. This is because punishment is not a part of discipline like a heart or a brain is a part of a person. The purpose, the definition of discipline is to educate and motivate a person to do “the right thing.” How one educates and motivates varies. However, it is important to note that rewarding of appropriate behavior and role-modeling of appropriate behavior are, according to MAPP, the two most effective ways of teaching some one to act in a socially-appropriate manner. In short, rewards and role models are the best disciplinary tools.

When rewards and role models do not prevent someone from running afoul of what is socially-appropriate, punishments come into play. Because the MAPP course was designed for foster parents, many of the punishments discussed during the fifth meeting are geared towards juveniles. One punishment discussed is “time-out.” Like the penalty box in hockey, time-out is designed to remove a child from a setting in which the child has made a wrong choice. Recognizing that leaving a person in the same physical and time setting in which a bad decision was made could escalate into more bad decisions, time-out is meant to allow the child in question to take a “time-out” and reflect on the error for the purpose of correcting said error and redeeming him/herself within a reasonable and realistic amount of time.

Because “time-out” is meant to foster better decision-making (and coping mechanisms), it is very important that (A) the child be afforded an appropriate environment free of stressors in which he/she can clearly reflect on errors and develop corrections and (B) then be allowed to redeem him/herself as soon as possible.

The basic standard for determining how long a child should remain in time-out is one minute per each year of the child’s age minus one. The reasoning for this standard is simple: if a child spends too much time in time-out, the child forgets the feelings associated with the error (if not the error itself) and thus the motivation to “do better” is diminished (if not lost altogether). In turn, the disciplinarian will have lost his/her own initiative and nothing positive is learned, nothing positive is gained by either party.

The highly-effective MAPP training (which is used by numerous states nationally and several countries internationally) also emphasizes the need to be always cognizant of the fact that disciplining a child in care is not the same as disciplining a child who has not suffered the clinically-documented trauma of coming into state custody. Many MAPP trainees (and trainers) experienced many punishments (including, but not limited to, corporal punishment) and – for the most part – they are all very well-adjusted as evidenced by their collective socially-appropriate behaviors. But, because differences in variables can – and often do – impact the sum/products of equations, it must be remembered that disciplining an individuals who have not enjoyed certain benefits taken for granted by some strata of our society will not necessarily yield the same socially-appropriate results.

For example, spanking a child or sending that child to bed with no dessert is not typically traumatic in a stable and nurturing environment. The child trusts the caregiver(s) enough to know that he/she/they is/are not trying to kill him/her. A child from an unstable and hostile setting could very easily interpret (and sometimes justifiably) those acts as being sinister and, therefore, unsettling.

In other words, discipline is ineffective if the one being disciplined is fearful and distrustful of the disciplinarian.

Returning the current sentencing practices of the criminal justice system in this country, are we really correcting the socially-inappropriate actions of people convicted of crimes with long sentences or are we creating a population that, via the inherent human instinct to adapt, no longer shocked? Further, if the latter is the case, are we contributing to a cycle of societal dysfunction via the creation of an increasingly institutionalized frame of bestial reference?

Would not a quick, intense intervention (such as the six-week “boot camps” for teens or jail terms measured in months and not years) be just as effective in scaring an offender straight as a splash of cold water in the morning is effective in waking a still drowsy person?

If one were to jump into a cold swimming pool, the shock would likely elicit yells and brief trauma to the central nervous system. If one, however, stayed in the pool, the body would eventually adjust to the change in temperature. The water’s temperature would not change; the person’s body would adjust to the temperature.

When it comes to sentencing, the writer believes that society as a whole is being done an egregious injustice when other human beings are left in the pool too long.

This is not “correction” – it is saturation.

Haiti: A Primer in Injustice

 

Wednesday, 10 March 2004 17:49 By José Pérez Many of the readers of this column may not remember Patrice Lumumba. Lumumba was the democratically elected head of state for an independent African nation who earned mass support among the majority of his impoverished constituents with his genuine anti-colonial platform. Naturally, the same ideology that won him the adoration of his people also marked him as a target for “The Man.” Lumumba eventually was faced with a radical separatist movement led by a power hungry thug. Naturally, that ambitious rogue enjoyed the financial support of “The Man.”  According to a Central Intelligence Agency station chief, Lumumba was eventually “delivered” to that same thug by, you guessed it, “The Man.” Eventually, with his people’s elected government stolen, Lumumba was tortured and killed by a firing squad. Many historians are not very religious but most do believe and swear by the ancient credo “History repeats itself.” It is because of times like these that this writer has to agree. A little over forty years after the rise of and robbery of Lumumba’s nationalist dream, the same thing is happening all over again – with almost little deviation from the original script – to Haiti’s President: Jean-Betrand Aristide. Aristide won much of the same support of Haiti’s poor Black masses that Lumumba did in the Congo. He also received much of the same hate from “The Man” that Lumumba did. Like Lumumba, Aristide has been abducted and is being held under guard while his fate is being bargained on.  Like Lumumba, Aristide has been the target of corporate media lies that are meant to both cover up and justify punitive actions by “The Man.” Let us begin with the first lie: Aristide won the 2000 Presidential election in Haiti by fraud.  When detractors go out of their way to talk about the “flawed election” of 2000, they are actually talking about the parliamentary elections held that year. During those legislative elections, only eight seats were questioned. Those seats were questioned because the winners in each of those instances won by a plurality of votes, not a majority. In other words, the winners did not garner more than half of the votes cast but they did garner more than their opponents. The real problem for the opposition arose because each of those seats were won by Lavalas party members. Lavalas is the party of which Aristide was the head of.  Crying foul almost before the dust finished settling on election day, the opposition began a campaign of political tantrums made almost legendary by its stamina. They continued to scream “fraud” so often that, eventually, some of them actually started to believe it.  Contrary to the fabricated image of a brutal Latin American dictator conjured up by mainstream mass media and hostile administrations, Aristide offered – on my occasions – to hold new parliamentary elections. Like a spoiled child, the opposition refused to participate in any new elections. Instead, they preferred to call for the immediate removal of Aristide from the President’s office.  Of course, the opposition did not satisfy itself with merely calling for his ouster – they also worked for it too. With the aid of right-wing Haitians living aboard and the complicity of some foreign governments, the opposition’s monetary, military, and – most dangerously – media strength grew as its electoral strength weakened. To whit, members of the opposition have acknowledged the popular support of Aristide. In a story published by The Miami Times in 2002, opposition member and former Jean-Claude Duvalier cabinet member Daniel Supplice admitted that the Aristide administration was “the most popular government Haiti’s ever had.” With that financial help, the opposition was able to assemble a cast of cutthroats and killers, thieves and thugs with one thing in common: a sadistic disregard for the value of human life.  Among the more infamous leaders of the “opposition” are the following death stars as profiled by the London-based Haiti Support Group: • Louis Jodel Chamblain – former co-leader of the Revolutionary Front for Haitian Advancement and Progress (FRAPH). Formed by the military junta that overthrew President Aristide during his first term in office in 1991, FRAPH (which also means “to hit”) wreaked egregious havoc on the people of Haiti between 1991 and 1994 when President Aristide was restored to power. Chamblain was convicted (in absentia) and sentenced to a life term of hard labor for his involvement in the assassination of a pro-democracy activist. Like his infamous FRAPH co-leader Emmanuel “Toto” Constant (who is enjoying the pleasures of freedom living in the United States), Chamblain escaped from Haiti to avoid the rule of law. Chamblain reappeared in Haiti recently to help overthrow the constitutionally-sanctioned Aristide government.  • Guy Phillippe – the rebellion’s most camera-hungry personality was an officer in the same Haitian army that overthrew Aristide during the 1991 coup d’etat. While Haiti was being ruled by the aforementioned junta in the early nineties, Phillippe was one of several officers that was trained by the United State’s Special Forces in South America. After the newly-restored President Aristide disbanded (but did not disarm) the army upon his return, Phillippe managed to secure a post with the newly formed state police. He fled Haiti in 2000 when it was discovered that he (along with other police officials) was plotting another attempt to overthrow the government.  • Jean-Baptiste Joseph – another former soldier, Joseph was the leader of the Assembly of Soldiers Retired Without Cause (a sort of militant VFW) in 1995. The Assembly was intimately tied to the Mobilization for National Development (MDN), a “neo-Duvalierist party” that is described as “leading member” of the Convergence Democratique, the primary alliance of opposition groups that pushed so hard for the outright violent removal of President Jean-Betrand Aristide. Like Phillippe, Joseph was accused of conspiring against the government. He was arrested but broken out of jail in a violent attack on the central police station in Port au Prince a few days later and never brought to trial. • Jean Tatoune – was a former “local leader of FRAPH.” Ten years ago, on April 22, Tatoune (whose real name is Jean Pierre Baptiste) led a attack on a Gonaïves slum named Raboteau, which was a pro-Aristide enclave. When the carnage was done, “between fifteen and twenty-five people were killed in what became known as the Raboteau massacre.” Convicted and imprisoned for the attack, Tatoune escaped from jail in Gonaïves in 2002 and cast his lot with Amiot Metayer’s Cannibal Army. Amiot was gunned down several months ago and his brother Butter has assumed control of the group. Another prominent member of the opposition is U. S. citizen Andre Apaid of the Group of 184. Born in the New York City suburb of Queens, Apaid is an affluent businessman that is – like many affluent Haitians – very anti-Aristide.  According to Mary Turck, editor of Connection to the Americas, the Convergence Democratique (along with other non-affiliated opposition groups) has been funded by the U. S. National Endowment for Democracy. In fact, the Resources to the Americas website reports that the NED “set up the Haitian Conference of Political Parties (CHPP), a coalition of 26 ‘opposition’ groups.” The Resources website described the majority of the represented groups as “right-wing” with many under the leadership of former cronies of both Duvalier regimes as well as that of ex-dictator General Henri Namphy.  In addition to pressure from the aforementioned, President Jean-Bertrand Aristide also was subjected to undue pressure from the neo-liberal economic entities of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The economic model of neo-liberalism is one that insists upon the removal of trade barriers that normally protect immature industry, big cutbacks on social spending such as education, healthcare, and welfare, the stripping of workers’ rights, and the privatization of national resources and assets.  The typical modes operandi of both the World Bank and the IMF is to lend money to poorer countries in exchange for the implementation of neo-liberal economic policies. Taking into account that Aristide’s power base has always been among the poor Black masses of Haiti, he was put in between the largest of rocks and the hardest of places. In order to get the money that his constituency needed, he would have to “sell out.” If he held firm to his nationalist principles and populist ideologies, the neo-liberal organs would not approve the much-needed loans. Of course, it was all moot. After finally being approved for a badly needed loan of approximately $300 million dollars, the United States moved to block the disbursement of the loan on grounds that Haiti held “flawed” elections in May of 2000. The irony of the United States penalizing another country for “flawed” elections in 2000 is rooted deeply in profound hypocrisy. Also hypocritical is the United States going to Iraq and Afghanistan to fight for democracy while working to overthrow a democratically elected government in the Caribbean.  In a telephone interview earlier this week, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas stated that she was “outraged” by the actions of the Bush administration in Haiti.  Initially choosing to stay out of the fight being won by forces it supported, the White House ignored pleas by Representatives Jackson Lee, Maxine Waters and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus, the Caribbean Community, and even President Aristide himself to help quell the rebellion and restore order. Described by Congresswoman Waters as a “wrong-headed policy”, the Bush team stood by and effectively let the legitimate government of Haiti be usurped by a band of bandits and mercernaries. Further troubling are the rising allegations that not only did the U.S. military compel Aristide to resign and leave (under the threat of being turned over to Phillippe) but also that the Haitian President is being guarded by American and French soldiers in the tiny Central African Republic (a pseudo-nation state described as a French stooge). What is probably most disheartening about all of this is that the information contained herein represents a mere fraction of what freedom-loving Americans should know about but do not. That, all by itself, it is as sad as it gets.

Waters, Jackson Lee Speak Out About Haiti

Waters, Jackson Lee Speak Out About Haiti
by José Pérez
Exclusive to Black Voice News (CA)

Piti, piti, wazo fe nich li is a Haitian proverb that says that "little by little, the bird builds its nest".

Like the proverbial bird, Maxine Waters has built a reputation as a no-nonsense fighter, an inexhaustible advocate, a passionate champion of those vulnerable entities in a world that sometimes praises the underdog and always rewards the mighty. Her battles have taken her from the high to the low, the backsliding to the on the go.

Right now, there are few people more vulnerable than the poor Black masses of Haiti. Their ancestors made history when they became the first humans to wage a successful slave revolt when they defeated the armies of Spain, Great Britain, and France.

Two months ago, Haiti celebrated its bicentennial with a grand program in Port au Prince. In attendance was an exuberant crowd numbering well into the tens of thousands if not more. With them was United States Congresswoman Maxine Waters.

Yet the accomplishment of being the world‚s first Black republic did not earn Haiti praises and accolades. Instead, Haiti’s proud patriots were punished with two hundred years of economic embargos, egregious exploitation, and media manipulation.

Just a few days ago, the democratically-elected government of President Jean-Betrand Aristide was overthrown by a sad cast of well-equipped murderers and rapists. Reports have emerged that Aristide was kidnapped. Although the White House denies the charge, Waters believes "that there was foul play."

"I am very worried about President Aristide," said Waters in an interview with The Black Voice News.

Waters’ Congressional colleague Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas found the news of the ouster to be "devastating" and added that the entire episode was "a travesty."

The legislators‚ concerns are well-founded as Waters was able to speak to Aristide after he was forced into exile via mobile telephone.

Prior to Aristide’s hasty forced departure, Waters and human rights activist Randall Robinson each had spoken to him every day for two weeks.

By now, millions of people know that President Aristide's government was overthrown but very few know who is responsible nor why. Congresswoman Waters stated that it was the "same business class [that] does not want Aristide to share [leadership] of Haiti."

"It is the same business class that sells all of the essential resources and does not want to pay taxes," said Waters. "They will not support any government that holds them accountable."

In addition to the economic motivation, the Representative feels that the President's opponents have a related political agenda as well.

"They want[ed] Aristide out so they can control the elections they know they can't win fairly."

Aristide's foes have benefited from the aid of both the Bush administration and affiliated right-wing organizations, such as the National Endowment for Democracy. Congresswoman Waters has gone on record on numerous occasions recently blasting the White House and the State Department for what she describes as their complicity with the anti-democratic rebel forces.

Last week, the Congressional Black Caucus held an emergency meeting with President George W. Bush, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and National Security Advisor Condi Rice imploring the current administration to take decisive action to help protect a fledging democracy in America’s backyard. Instead being promised a crack team of Marines to ride in like the cavalry to help the constitutionally legitimate government of Haiti fight off would-be tyrants, the CBC was told that ships were being sent to Haiti to prevent an exodus of refugees.

"That's all the President cares about," said Waters about Bush.

Through all of the sad turn of events in Haiti that have marked the days and weeks that followed the euphoria of the bicentennial festivities, the CBC has been adamant about where it places responsibility. "We're holding the President accountable," said Waters. Jackson Lee stated that the CBC would "not let this go."

Describing the United States as a "moral compass," Representative Jackson Lee said that "we owe the world" a better example of ethical leadership. This would have been an obvious and appropriate opportunity" to support democracy in the Americas said Jackson Lee.

The Representative from California also feels that Aristide "has been a victim of the major press." Saying that "the lies [are] absolutely unbelievable," Waters boils at the constant war of misinformation she feels is being waged against Aristide's Lavalas party.


One example of the sort of information that Waters feels that the American corporate media is not sharing with the people of the United States concerns the successful efforts of the Aristide government and a local grassroots group to turn the former mansion of an infamous Duvalier stooge into a primary school for the children of a small town. This was originally reported by the online BlackCommentator after "a prominent U. S. journalist" was not able to convince his editors to print the story.

Celebrating the First Black Republic in History: A Moral Obligation

Celebrating the First Black Republic in History: A Moral Obligation
by José Pérez for the Black Voice News (Riverside/San Bernardino, CA)

In Spartacus, Kirk Douglas played a Roman slave that led an epic struggle for freedom. For countless moviegoers, this motion picture was awesome and inspiring – and heartbreaking.

In the end, the brave band of unlikely warriors saw their rebellion end as just about every slave insurrection in history has: in bitter, crushing defeat. However, in the long and oft times obscured annals of history, there stands one slave revolt that did indeed rip away the shackles: Haiti. This New Year’s Day, in the year 2004, this small, poor, yet perpetually proud Caribbean nation and its children throughout the world will celebrate its bicentennial. On January 1st, Haitians everywhere will celebrate a victory so improbable, so impossible that it still evades true comprehension and, thus, true appreciation.

In the late 18th century, Haiti was known as San Dominque and it occupied the western half of the heavily colonized Antillean island of Hispaniola. It was the richest colony in the world and, as a result, was the greatest jewel in imperial France’s mercantile crown. Sugar, coffee, and other sources of almost innumerable revenue for the French helped make France the most powerful nation on Earth at that time.

Indeed, had it not been for French military and economic aid, the American Revolution may not have ended in victory for the ranks of Washington and Jefferson.

To help maximize the profit margins of these commercial endeavors, the French employed the best method known to Europeans at the time for lowering labor overhead.

The “institution” of slavery was well-entrenched in San Dominque and quite sadistic. Because the French were of the belief that the number of Africans available to satiate their inhuman greed was inexhaustible, the practice of literally working slaves to an early and brutal death was more than common; it was the rule.

C. L. R. James, in The Black Jacobins, wrote that “the planters deliberately worked [the slaves] to death rather than wait for the children to grow up.” Thus, at the time of the inevitable slave uprising, more than two thirds of the almost half million slaves in San Dominque had survived the cruel Middle Passage.

Of course, many African-American students of history know about the aforementioned as well as the legendary Toussaint L’Ouverture, the self-educated slave who succeeded in the West Indies where Spartacus failed in ancient Rome.

That, however, is not meant to be the scope of this article. No, it is painfully apparent that this particular part of this important story is not enough to rouse the sort of excitement and devotion to “Hayti cheri” that every person of African descent should feel in his or her bosom when that noble name is uttered. The sad reality is that most African-Americans have a negative and very inaccurate perception of Haiti and its significance in the pantheon of human achievement.

Where did Haiti get such a “bad rep”? From the same source that still tries to tell Black Americans that Malcolm X was an evil devil in glasses. In delivering a speech about “the only self-made Black republic in the world” during the Chicago World Fair in 1893, Frederick Douglass explained the reasons for the well-documented American hate of Haiti in very plain terms. “Haiti is Black, and we have not yet forgiven Haiti for being Black or forgiven the Almighty for making her Black.”


Haiti is more than Black. Haiti is, as James wrote, “Africa in the West Indies.” Because so many of the Blacks in Haiti at the time of the revolution actually remembered what life was like in Africa, many of the rich cultural traditions survived and shaped an incredible national identity. It was in Haiti, early in the twentieth century, that the cultural and artistic movement known as “Negritude” was born. A definitively Afrocentric movement, Negritude preceded (and likely influenced) the Harlem Renaissance that followed.

Much of the food, dance, religion, language, et cetera that is so integral to what it is to be Haitian is without a doubt quite African.

Haiti’s historical place as what Douglass called “the original pioneer emancipator of the nineteenth century” is beyond debate. As America’s great Emancipator pointed out 110 years ago in Chicago, “until [Haiti] spoke, no Christian nation had abolished Negro slavery” nor even given legitimate debate to the thought.

Not only did the victory of Haiti’s proud male and female warriors influence how and when the African slave trade and practice in the Western Hemisphere would die, it also directly impacted the freedom of millions of Spanish-speaking Americans.

While Haiti was still in the very early moments of its republican infancy, a desperate Simón Bolívar arrived in Haiti lucky to be alive after his first disastrous attempt to oust Spain from South America. Haitian President Alexandre Pétion, who had succeeded Jean-Jacques Dessalines after his death, generously gave Bolívar more than just asylum and respite.

He outfitted the young Bolívar (who’s godmother was a Black Cuban woman) with arms, ammunition, funds, and soldiers on his eventual return to what would become the independent nations of Venezuela, Colombia, Peru, and Ecuador.


Pétion’s only request of Bolívar was the permanent abolition of slavery in all liberated territories.

Dessalines was the man that, on January 1st, 1804, in Gonaïves, declared that it was “not enough to have expelled from your country the barbarians who have bloodied it for two centuries . . . which held for so long our spirits in the most humiliating torpor. . . we must at last live independent or die,” as he tore the white from the French flag thus creating the modern flag of Haiti.


Haiti’s contribution to the United States herself is significant and, unfortunately, swept under the historical rug. One of the aftershocks of the rag tag group of bare footed and ill-equipped Africans defeating not only the French but also the British and the Spanish during ill-fated attempts to gain control of San Dominque was that it forced Napoleon to rethink his grand plans for the Americas. More than a decade before the Duke of Wellington defeated him at Waterloo, Napoleon had to swallow a disastrous defeat in Haiti when ten of thousands of his best troops (under the command of Leclerc, the French dictator’s second in command) were devastated by Haitian patriots.

These same Haitians were told that, if he or she died for fighting for freedom, their soul would travel back to Africa where it would rest in peace.

Because his best could not retake his most valuable, Napoleon thought it a waste of time and resources to hold his largest. Hence, one of the biggest bargains in the history of real estate, the Louisiana Purchase, fell into the slave holding lap of Thomas Jefferson.

Not too long afterward, Haitian President Jean-Pierre Boyer invited American Blacks to resettle in Haiti. This invitation was as per the Haitian constitution, which guarantees a home to all people of African descent.

Richard Allen, the founder of the African Methodist Episcopal Church, led approximately 2,000 people to the Caribbean in the mid 1820’s. Among the group led by Allen to Haiti was Alexander Du Bois who stayed in there for about a decade before he returned to the United States. With him, he brought a son born there, Alfred, who later became the father of W. E. B. DuBois.

The contributions of Haiti and her children to oppressed people around the world in general and Black people in America specifically are too numerous to mention in this brief space. However, if the above is not enough to finally convince the reader of the special cause for celebration for all people of African descent on January 1st, then perhaps nothing will awaken such pride within the conscious.

That is because to celebrate Haitian independence on January 1st is akin to the more commonly known Black power mantras first made popular in this country during the 1960’s. To lift one’s voice in praise of the sacrifices of tens of thousands of forever unknown Africans in Haiti two hundred years ago is to continue what luminaries such as Jamaica’s Marcus Garvey and Trinidad’s George Padmore worked so tirelessly for in the 20th century.

To always remember and remind others that Haiti “was the first of the New World in which the black man asserted his right to be free and was brave enough to fight for his freedom and fortunate enough to gain it,” as Douglass said, is to do your part to express gratitude for how Haiti “grandly served the cause of universal human liberty.”

To teach your children Haiti’s motto “L’union fait la force” (in unity there is strength), is to ensure that neither they nor their children will have to suffer through what your parents and their parents did during less free times in this country.

Put most simply and truthfully, when you say “Vive Haiti”, you are declaring that “Black is very beautiful.”

Riverside Sheriff Reaches Out to Community

Riverside Sheriff Reaches Out to Community
by José Pérez
Black Voice News

When Bob Doyle was sworn in as Riverside County’s new sheriff, many observers saw it as the culmination of a long and accomplished career in law enforcement. 

For Doyle, a lifelong resident of Riverside County, the new post marked the beginning of a new chapter in his personal desire to see a more harmonious relationship develop between the community he was born and raised in and the department that he has spent his entire adulthood working for.

“I am a strong believer in relationships,” said Doyle.

Fostering, building, and enhancing the relationships between any police department and the community it serves is always a daunting and tricky challenge. Doing so in Riverside County, California will have to involve something other than tricks. The history of tension and tragedy between the department and the community – especially the minority community – was already long and sad when the gut-wrenching death of Tyisha Miller shocked many. 

Effecting a change on a well-entrenched institutional culture is never easy but Doyle figures that he has some advantages that others may not have had in similar situations in other agencies. He has spent virtually his entire adult life working for the sheriff’s department and he has lived his entire life in Riverside County as a resident. Moreover, he sees his biggest advantage in very plain terms: he wants to make it happen. He stated “I am dedicated to doing everything I can … I think it is important.”

“I want to truly partner with the community,” said the veteran cop. “Helping each other to understand each other and being open” is important, according to Doyle.

How does he plan to achieve that level of understanding? One of the more important tenets for Doyle is to stress the importance of “being tolerant.” In other words, individuals on both sides of the police divide have to understand that they will not always agree with nor understand one another. Tolerance is the key to maintaining peace when comprehension is not a viable option. Still, sheriff department public information officer Shelly Kennedy-Smith said that it is important that the community understands “what we’re doing and why we’re doing it.”

Doyle also hopes to gain ground via community policing whereby his deputies are looked at as equal members of the community just like a teacher or a preacher. The sheriff referred to this as returning to the practice of the “beat cop, [of] cultivating relationships via interaction” with the people in the neighborhood. This is important to the sheriff’s department for more than just good public relations. When the cop on the beat has developed “that relationship, in times of crisis that becomes critical” because the person in need of help will feel more comfortable coming to “officer friendly” beat cop versus some stranger with a gun that he/she has never met before.

For Doyle, it is all about how community members “help each other.”

Kennedy-Smith added that the goal was to secure an “updated, current perception for our personnel” in the community.

The bottom line for the Sheriff’s department is making sure that every resident of Riverside County can enjoy their lives in one of America’s fastest growing communities without having to worry about their safety. The goal is, according to Kennedy-Smith, to “keep, maintain, promote peace.”

urlink to published article