Jackson Free Press

JACKSON – The firestorm that surrounded Richard Barrett's attempt to bring Edgar Ray Killen to the State Fair, and the one that has now swirled around Councilman Kenneth Stokes' Stokes' invitation to Imari Obadele to speak at a Black History Program at Jackson City Hall, highlight something very significant. Although race relations in Jackson, and in Mississippi as a whole, have improved, the fact is we still have a lot of work to do. The emotional outpourings generated by these events clearly demonstrate the depth of hurt, pain and division that still exists. Our hearts go out to the Skinner family, because you have had to endure this very painful episode.

The Jackson Human Relations Council has decided to use the Obadele event, as well as the Edgar Ray Killen State Fair event, to explore the related facts and issues and to provide opportunities to educate our citizens. Along the way, we hope to celebrate the progress that has been made in Mississippi and specifically in Jackson. It is our opinion that there is no just reasoning for the political sniping, name calling, and other inflammatory gestures that took place at City Hall and subsequently by some of the media.

We are aware that much of our past needs to be revisited in order to deal with the lingering hurt and bitterness that lies smoldering just beneath the surface. Yet we know that if this revisiting is to bring further progress, it must be done in an environment of healing, reconciliation and understanding. If the dialogue occurs outside this context, the populace of Jackson and Mississippi as a whole will remain bewildered and frustrated, as was the case of February 1st.
Now is the time for reason. We call on all citizens to resist attempts to divide our citizens and attempts to smear the good efforts that are being made in Jackson. We encourage all citizens to commit to working together in a serious and considerate way to explore the truth of our history, and not to allow rhetoric to sidetrack the healing process.

The Jackson Human Relations Council will work in conjunction with our elected officials, congregations, business and civic organizations, and individual citizens to address the underlying racial tensions which are still present; while seeking solutions that will help us to truly progress.
Yes, a lot has changed in Jackson during the past thirty years. Please work with us as we continue to create positive change. Watch for activities planned by the Jackson Human Relations Council and join with us as we work together for our children and for the future of our City.

JACKSON HUMAN RELATIONS COUNCIL
P.O. Box 2248, 119 N. Congress Street
Jackson, MS 39225-2248
e-mail: [e-mail missing]
office: 960-8475

Bishop Ronnie Crudup, Co-Chair
The Rt. Rev. Duncan Gray, III, Co-Chair

Previous Comments

ID

131357

Comment

Oh god. "Our past needs revisiting?" I was hoping we'd apologised enough for it and agreed to move on. I know I'm ready to go on.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2005-02-10T17:02:54-06:00

ID

131358

Comment

So, move on. However, all those politicians pandering to the Council of Conservative Citizens don't seem to have gotten the reconciliation memo just yet.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-02-10T17:21:28-06:00

ID

131359

Comment

It's not about apologising. It's about learning about what happened, listening to all sides, understanding what went on, and seeing people on all sides as people. At least, that's the way I see it. Stories need to be told, the mythos of the city and state need to be updated to include multiple viewpoints. Stuff like that. Something more than 'forgive and forget.'

Author

kate

Date

2005-02-10T18:33:54-06:00

ID

131360

Comment

I was hoping we'd apologised enough for it and agreed to move on. I know I'm ready to go on. I've had your words on the brain for the last few hours, Ironghost. Let me ask you: Who should decide if we've apologized "enough"? And what form have all those past apologies taken here in Mississippi? The truth is that, as far as I know, Dick Molpus is the only statewide official ever to apologize for any of our civil-rights murders; has anyone here ever officially apologized for slavery? And what's so wrong with apologizing for something very horrible? Couldn't it be catharctic? Couldn't it lead to understanding, dialogue? Watch this: "I'm sorry my people hurt yours. I'm sorry. What can I do to help?" Is that really so damn hard? I don't feel any worse, any smaller, for saying those words. In fact, every time I say them, I feel a bit better. OK, the words aren't enough, but what's wrong with saying something so decent and compassionate? The impression I always get is that the people who protest the most are the ones who actually seem the least apologetic. They want to just forget something awful ever happened. But turn the tables for a second; be empathic. Allow yourself to walk in someone else's shoes. Take Obadele: one of the primary complaints I've heard about him, even from Stringfellow today, is that he didn't show remorse for a member of his group shooting and killing Louis Skinner. OK, I've had that he has in the past, but whether or not that is true, why not show some remorse last week? Why would it hurt his cause? [Truth is: I'm not sure whether he showed remorse or not, past or present. I'm using it as an example.] The point is, the family of Louis Skinner would find some comfort in that expression of remorse or sorrow. It would indicate a willingness to work together with new generations of Mississippians, regardless of what their parents and grandparents did. The point I'm making is that we all need to reach out in this way. No, weóyou and Iódidn't enslave blacks, and most of us didn't enforce Jim Crow (although quite a few did, and those old buggers really need to apologize, and fast). We have to play the card we're dealt, thoughóand we were dealt a tough one by our forbears here in Mississippi. Pretending that we weren't doesn't change a damn thing. The cards are still on the table. But what will change something is the class and the courage and the willingness to look another human being in the eyes and feel their pain as best we can. To try to figure out how to heal wounds and repair the legacies of the madness of the past. To help younger generations of Mississippians hurt by the practices of the older ones. And, yes, to apologize to our fellow human beings if that will make them feel better, or us, for that matter.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-02-10T22:39:44-06:00

ID

131361

Comment

"If a brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food, and one of you says to them, 'Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill,' and yet you do not supply their bodily needs, what is the good of that? So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead." James 2:15-17 Substitute reconciliation for faith and you get my point. The racist 'past' of MS & the nation has left blacks out in the cold. A Truth & Reconciliation Committee can maybe apologize or something...and blacks will still be left out in the cold with underfunded schools, poor health care, shitty or no jobs, police violence, poor housing and more. And they're supposed to come help whites reconcile with their past? On her editorial comment pagel, Ladd quoted this: "The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was set up by the Government of National Unity to help deal with what happened under apartheid. The conflict during this period resulted in violence and human rights abuses from all sides. No section of society escaped these abuses. " This is typical equivocating nonsense. As Trotsky famously said: "A slave-owner who through cunning and violence shackles a slave in chains, and a slave who through cunning or violence breaks the chainsólet not the contemptible eunuchs tell us that they are equals before a court of morality!"

Author

jason

Date

2005-02-11T08:34:15-06:00

ID

131362

Comment

LOVE the Bible verse, Jason. Thanks. As the Bible is cherrypicked all over the place, it's nice to just get in there and quote what's at the heart of the whole thing. The racist 'past' of MS & the nation has left blacks out in the cold. A Truth & Reconciliation Committee can maybe apologize or something...and blacks will still be left out in the cold with underfunded schools, poor health care, s***** or no jobs, police violence, poor housing and more. ... This is typical equivocating nonsense. True, if all that happened were a bunch of people sitting around a table and apologizing. That's only one step--and it's a step that can lead to some might change and actions. I fully realize I'm not radical enough for your tastes, and I accept my failings ; however, I will remind you that we are also calling for better school funding, better health care, job creation, a stop to brutality (and efforts not to put folks in offices who promote police brutality), better housing, etc. We can sit in front of a computer all we want and talk about apologies -- or, frankly, armed revolution -- but it's action that matters. I don't know what actions you're taking on a daily basis to help lessen the laundry list of problems you're talking about, but I challenge you to be sure you're doing more than using a keyboard to accuse others of "nonsense" -- although I'm happy to provide you a free forum to do such a thing. I also find it rather illogical to complain that people aren't willing to step up and take care of the problems you list -- and then to complain even louder when someone tries to get them to talk about the problems so they understand what they can do to fix them. It seems that your argument is either your born a revolutionary to your liking, or you're just utter "nonsense." Nonsense, Jason. And wasn't there a reparations component to the "Truth & Reconcilation" effort in South Africa? There also need to be discussions here about what we need to do to level the playing field in communities stymied/created by slavery and Jim Crow. We can't expect people to pick themselves up by their bootstraps if they're not wearing boots. However, we can expect communities to fully participate in empowering their own people -- and there are many efforts right here in Jackson to do just that. Every decent Jacksonian should be doing their part to help make that happen, instead of sitting around whining about (a) apologizing too much for what happened to black people or (b) that Communism never took hold in the U.S. Enough armchair revolution; there's workóor should I say "works"óto be done; let's get to it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-02-11T10:00:37-06:00

ID

131363

Comment

I didn't call the whole commission or that whatever "nonsense", I called the statemetn that "the conflict during this period resulted in violence and human rights abuses from all sides" equivocating nonsense. I did accuse the commission of being "faith [reconciliation] without works", which Ladd rebuts by saying "we" (by which I assume she means the JFP) is calling for more 'works', which doesn't make sense to me but maybe i didn't understand her. "I also find it rather illogical to complain that people aren't willing to step up and take care of the problems you list -- and then to complain even louder when someone tries to get them to talk about the problems so they understand what they can do to fix them. It seems that your argument is either your born a revolutionary to your liking, or you're just utter "nonsense."" I found that 'illogical' as well--except I don't think the commission is seriously going to try to fix the problems, as it's based on the one in South Africa, which didn't either. You ask about a reparations component? Newsweek's Jan 24th issue has an article called "critics say economic empowerment policies have created a black elite but done little to help the masses" (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6831551/site/newsweek/). I don't reject struggles for changes to benefit the immediate needs of the masses, but I do reject 'struggles' whose history has shown them to be dead ends that serve to detour struggle. So **I do not counterpose reform and revolution, I oppose methods that I believe to be historically and pragmatically bankrupt**. I don't reject the truth commission because it's only reformist, I reject it because the best of intentions mean very little when it comes down to pratical results. If I thought it could actually do something that would materially benefit the masses, I would consider critically supporting it--I've seen no evidence that it will do so and have ample evidence for the much lauded, but little researched South African example that it won't.

Author

jason

Date

2005-02-11T12:24:07-06:00

ID

131364

Comment

Actually, the CofCC thing has led to newer thinking here. I'm still not a fan of dredging the past back up, but I do find that writing it all down, from all viewpoints results in a very fascinating story. Sure, it's tragic, but the tragedy spreads across all "players". And if everyone can see the real story, not just what they've been told or heard about, then I hope people will come to their senses and quit this madness we seem to inherit. We should get it all set down in our memories correctly, if only to de-power our current crop of boneheaded racists. If it falls to our generation to fix the mess our forefathers left us, then that's what we'll have to do.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2005-02-11T13:04:36-06:00

ID

131365

Comment

We should get it all set down in our memories correctly, if only to de-power our current crop of boneheaded racists. If it falls to our generation to fix the mess our forefathers left us, then that's what we'll have to do. Beautifully said, Ironghost. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-02-11T13:34:15-06:00

ID

131366

Comment

Jason, I apologize if I read too much into your statements. I admit I was still half asleep when I responded, for what it's worth. However, I still think you are quick to say what a Truth & Reconciliation panel will or will not do, yet, considering it hasn't even formed, yet! I don't think such a panel here should be just like one in South Africa -- but it can learn from it what it needs to do. We are rather in the nascent stages on this idea. When I said "we," I should have said what we SHOULD be doing with such a commission -- rather than just apologizing and talking. That is, leading to understanding, and thus real change, etc. I was probably morphing that with what the JFP is already trying to do: call for changes in the laundry list of problems you mentioned. My bottom line is, I will do anything in my power to make such a commission happen and then to help ensure that it makes a real difference. I'll also mention that the idea for this was first put into my head in a conversation with civil rights veterans a few weeks back when we were having a discussion about the Edgar Ray Killen case, much as we'd had on the Web site. They were taking much the same position that you do -- saying that the prosecution of him doesn't matter so much now -- but that what really needed to happen was a Truth & Reconciliation Commission where people of all sorts would be honest about what really happened. They -- including Dave Dennis -- believe this is more important that the prosecution of Killen. Personally, I want to see both happen, and then some.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-02-11T13:53:20-06:00

ID

131367

Comment

What do I have to appologise for? I am confused? I was born in 1973! its time to move on. Also, if all sides need to be heard, as Kate claims, does that mean that Edgar Ray Killins side needs to be heard as well, on the steps of city hall no less? (i think he and Obedele are both morons) Just my opinion.

Author

RightonTarget

Date

2005-02-11T14:42:44-06:00

ID

131368

Comment

Of course, Edgar Ray Killen's side needs to be heard. He was on TV this week, and he'll get his day in court. And if he is willing to come to a panel in City Hall and talk truthfully about what happened, to give his side, I think that would be wonderful. That's the American way.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-02-11T15:29:24-06:00

ID

131369

Comment

Ok, but who gets to decide what is "truthful"? Unless God Himself is there, or both Killens and Obedele are willing to be hooked to polygraph machines who is to say its truthful? On second thought the lie detector would not work, because both morons, Killens and Obedele, have convinced themselves thoruoughly that they are right. Why not instead have someone POSITIVE like Eli Manning, or Duece MacCallister come speak? Why must we (both sides) keep dredging up the 50's and 60's????

Author

RightonTarget

Date

2005-02-11T15:45:51-06:00

ID

131370

Comment

Per that thinking, I can't imagine why we would bother to have courts. And we could never, ever execute a person because, as you say, who gets to decide what is "truthful"? Besides, a Truth & Reconciliation panel wouldn't be about guilt; it would be about dialogue. And God knows, we need that.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-02-11T15:59:25-06:00

ID

131371

Comment

The "truth" is what happened, not how different sides interpret how something happened. You know, take the Spin out and see what really went on.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2005-02-11T16:09:08-06:00

ID

131372

Comment

Ehhh, well per the courts Obedele IS convicted, so based on your argument, he is guilty. Killens is not convicted (yet). And what should the dialogue be ABOUT? Let me use a somewhat arcane argument: Just as black people get tired of hearing about how blacks cause crime (seeing as how the vast majority of the black population are law abiding citizens). White people are TIRED of hearing about how awful they (some of whom were not even born) treated blacks in the 50's and 60's. It is simply beating a dead horse to keep on dredging up these old caes just to piss a lot of people off. Not grousing at you Ladd, just trying to make a point.

Author

RightonTarget

Date

2005-02-11T16:13:04-06:00

ID

131373

Comment

ROT, I think the point is NOT to tell the other side how awful they were. I think the point is simply to talk about what happened from all sides. What was it like to be a kid who was bused to another district? what was it like to be a priest advocating racial equality to a racist congregation? What was it like to have a cross burned in your yard? What was it like? It's incredible history and sociology and psychology and it's all right here in our own yards. Why not hear what people have to say? And I agree with Ironghost - it's about de-powering the bonhead racists.

Author

kate

Date

2005-02-13T12:50:32-06:00

ID

131374

Comment

Just as black people get tired of hearing about how blacks cause crime (seeing as how the vast majority of the black population are law abiding citizens). White people are TIRED of hearing about how awful they (some of whom were not even born) treated blacks in the 50's and 60's. ROT, you are the one so enlightened and post-the-need-to-talk-about-race-ever-again that you have the class to call the Metrocenter Mall "Ghettro," presumably because many black people now shop there, because so many white people moved to get away from them. Dude, you are evidence in plain view of why these kinds of dialogues are still needed. This horse is alive and kicking. And, too, agree with Ironghost on the need to de-power the bonehead racists.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-02-13T14:05:51-06:00

ID

131375

Comment

Ladd: "Dude, you are evidence in plain view of why these kinds of dialogues are still needed. This horse is alive and kicking." It's easy for Ladd to jump the conclusion that ROT evidence of racism because he calls Metrocenter, "Ghettro". Perhaps ROT is a racist b/c he says he's going to Ghettro instead of Metro. However, Ladd is unable to decide if Stokes is a racist or not? Very interesting. More evidence that JFP politics should be taken not with a grain of salt but a couple of pounds of salt. Ladd: "This horse is alive and kicking." You're right. Racism is alive... on both sides. But it's dying. All WE (younger generation) can due is shoot this old stubborn horse and live together. But the actions of Stokes and Obadale do nothing but strive on hatred. They aren't trying to help race relations, instead they (like many whites and blacks) are profitting from it... either politically or financially. People like Stokes, Obadale, and Barrett can't let racism die because then they will be out of a job.

Author

jlp

Date

2005-02-14T11:29:53-06:00

ID

131376

Comment

Boy is that 2nd paragraph messed up. It should say: "It's easy for Ladd to jump to the conclusion that ROT is evidence of racism because he calls Metrocenter, "Ghettro"." Must start proofing before posting.

Author

jlp

Date

2005-02-14T11:32:17-06:00

ID

131377

Comment

I didn't say "ROT is evidence of racism" -- I'm arguing that his racist statement (calling a majority-black mall "ghettro") is evidence that here is still plenty of racist language out there that needs to be exposed and discussed. And that's in the context of him saying that there is no need to talk about race anymore, even as he so easily uses the phrase "ghettro." I don't know ROT and have no way of knowing whether he is a "racist" -- and, as I've said, I try not to call individuals that too often because it's defined so many different ways by different people, so it becomes an inflammatory epithet, rather than a meaningful discussion point. However, I think it is very useful to talk about the race implications of language, as well as the community perceptions (and, thus, harm) such language promotes.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-02-14T13:23:26-06:00

ID

131378

Comment

However, Ladd is unable to decide if Stokes is a racist or not? Very interesting. I just saw this part, jlp. I'll try to answer quickly as I'm the anti-blogger today. Actually, I don't know if ROT is a racist or not; we were discussing racist language, which he may well not have meant to be because he and his friends have used it so much and such. With Stokes, I have never said he doesn't use "racist" language; I believe he does. But I have also said that I am not thoroughly convinced he is "a racist" -- that is, that he has shown himself clearly to be perpetuating policies to establish black supremacy. I've gone point by point through the only statements that have been posted on this blog by him that people say prove he's "a racist" and have shown why I don't find them convincing evidence. That's on another thread. Of course, much hinges on how you define "racism" and "racist." I really think we need to go further down the road, but frankly just haven't had time to open the can of worms. I have a book excerpt I really want to share, but it's a little lengthy. But, this week, I promise that I will open a thread on "What is racism?" and we can have at it. Also, I do not believe it was "racist" for Kenneth Stokes to invite Imari Obadele to speak at City Hall. You can say it was distasteful or offensive or whatever, but "racist" just doesn't seem to fit this instance. That doesn't mean nothing that was said can't be interpreted that way, but the invitation itself doesn't reek of "racism." And no one on the blog, yet, has said anything convincing to show that it was.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-02-14T13:42:45-06:00

ID

131379

Comment

Well, it literally is mind boggling how one publication can repeatedly report on the overwhelming racism in this state/city and not believe Mr. Stokes is part of the problem. Perhaps this is because I am not an "apologist" and must move on for my good and the good of others. I am deeply disgusted over slavery, Crowe, lynching, etc. I have tried to live my life understanding that these terrible things happened but I'm not going to apologize for something I haven't done. I am not guilty of racism simply because I'm white. Please tell me what I have to apologize for and I'll think about it. Ladd, is there one black person living today who you consider racist and could you name him? Please refrain from naming "Uncle Tom's"... I'm asking about a black who's racist against whites. Possibly someone who may say things similar to the rantings at the "Obadale council meeting." Also, will your fact checking system check out the statements made by Obadale, Stokes, and that lawyer at the council meeting. I believe all three skewed the facts a bit (they lied). I'm honestly not trying to be a jerk, I would just like to hear if you believe the traditional role of racism (white on black) can be reversed in your mind. I know you have said it can but I don't recall hearing any examples.

Author

jlp

Date

2005-02-14T14:27:58-06:00

ID

131380

Comment

It is mind-boggling to me, jlp, how important it is to many people that other people are called "racist." You seem to reading every fifth sentence that I write, which a few folks like to do; thus, I am simply not going to repeat everything I've written on this topic thus far. It is displayed on the blog for all to see. I'm sorry, jlp, that you do not appreciate the reason that I am trying to avoid calling anyone "a racist" (other than perhaps folks who run supremacist organizations, and one can even have a debate about Richard Barrett's actual motives). It truly amazes me how many people call other people a "racist" because they call other people a "racist" -- but then aren't interested in actually talking about the reasons and the language itself. See the dizzying cycle here? So, no, I am not going to stoop to name-calling because you would like me to. I'm honestly not trying to be a jerk, I would just like to hear if you believe the traditional role of racism (white on black) can be reversed in your mind. Yes, I do -- although some others do not. However, we still need to explore the defintion of racism -- just because, for instance, someone like ROT using a racist phrase doesn't necessarily make him/her a racist, in my view. And, as I promised, we will do that on its own thread after I get this issue out. You'll have to be patient, though, because this a big can of worms to open. And I'm the anti-blogger today. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-02-14T14:53:48-06:00