NAACP at 100 - a new agenda?
February 12, 2009 - 1:22pm
The [USA's] oldest civil rights organization celebrates its 100th birthday today under the reins of a young new leader who wants to expand the group's focus from civil rights for African Americans to human rights for everyone.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/11/MNO215EH69.DTL
Thanks for that, Ze.
Sometimes we need a reminder that progress is being made - as slow as the process might be.
Yes, thanks Ze.
It's also a reminder that each step of "progress" historically has had to be fought, over and over, until it was won.
Today we might think that lynching is/was so wrong and bad, that even white progressives of the time would have "known" the wrongness of lynching. Not at all.
This is the same society (Canada too) in which slavery was legalized, right? The transatlantic slave trade was abolished not because of any ethical issues about selling buying and owning human beings, but because it was no longer financially viable for the businessmen.
Actually, slavery was acted against in Canada 40 years ahead of its eventual abolition in Britain - and 70 years before the Emancipation Proclamation of our American neighbours.
That said, it is still a sordid part of our history that some would ignore or deny.
There are those saying the NAACP is no longer relevant, doesn't speak to the lived realities of the majority of African-Americans, and so on. It was unable to do much to swing the Proposition 8 (ban equal marriage) referendum in California, for instance.
I think the article points to the continued creativity and relevance in niche issues at least of the NAACP, working alongside groups that are more radical (in the "getting to roots" sense). The article it seems to be does not actually back up the title - Afrocentricity remains central to the NAACP concerns, it's not turning into "Black AI" or anything like that. But the way they are trying to marry "domestic" and "international" looks like a really innovative direction.
Ze, I read the comments and then asked myself, why am I doing this? Why aggravate myself for no reason? So I stopped.
I agree that the NAACP has clearly shifted mandates several times over the years as gains were made and goals reached. There is of course nothing wrong with having an Afrocentric focus, and it will be interesting to see what they shift to.
I have heard of some critiques of the NAACP, from USian POC communities, but don't know enough to comment about them.
If the NAACP has determined that African American issues are no longer it's foremost and primary agenda, and that such issues shall be subsumed under whatever other issues of human rights might come their way, then it is time to disband.
Even now / We are not lost: If you look out at the night / You'll see the colours and the lights seem to say / People are not far away, at least in distance, / And it's only our own dumb resistance / That's making us stay.
ZE :
I think its not fair (or accurate ) to blame the way the prop 8 vote went, on just African Americans.
The whites were the majority, and did not overwhelmingly support same sex marriages.
Its easy to blame it on the African American communites, even when the facts dont support that.
Its interesting that the majority white conservatives were glossed over, in the haste to blame the Africans.
The majority of the religiouse groups in the US are conservative when it comes to issues of sequality, and thre is verry little dialoge btw them and the mainstream Gay rights activist.
Interesting, AfroHealer. Most of the anger I heard in the media and blogs and such about Prop 8 was directed at the Catholic Church and the Mormon Church. And certainly the latter is predominantly white (and the leadership of the Catholic church is, too, although I'm not sure what the demographics of the Catholic Church would be like in California).
But I definitely also heard the whole "black church hates gays" thing too. Which is stupid. All fundamentalist and woman-hating, gaybashing churches were heavily lobbying in favour of Prop 8, and the majority of the people who attend fundy churches are white, not black. No need to single out black congregations when you've got religious nutbars like Rick Warren and his Saddleback Franchise (and a ton of other megachurches just like his) throwing their political and financial might behind gaybashing initiatives like Prop 8.
I agree 100% AfroHealer, and I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I think Aftica-Americans are to blame for the defeat of Proposition 8. I certainly don't think that. I was referring to debates in California right now over "what went wrong" and one major criticism of the No campaign is that they ignored communities (the gay community itself, and communities of colour) in favour of a top-down approach. The criticism here was that their sole outreach to African-Americans was through the NAACP, and there are many saying that the NAACP is no longer a grassroots voice for African-Americans.
Not about the NAACP, but in the interests of avoiding thread proliferation--
Bridge crossers remember Selma
Wonderful article, Ze. Thank you for posting it.
Oh, and fyi, please don't ever worry about thread proliferation/duplication in the anti-racism forum.