Black Lives Matter, Let's Be Honest for a Moment!

Kris Straub/Chainsawsuit

The above cartoon, drawn by Kris Straub, is pretty clever, I will admit.  It comes as a series of articles written both advocating and decrying the controversial Black Lives Matter movement has swept across the nation.  The cartoon got me thinking, is that what "All Lives Matter" people actually mean to say.  Well, the answer is maybe, but maybe not.  In Straub's cartoon, it shows someone dousing the house that is not burning, meanwhile the house that is burning is left in flames under the belief that everyone should care equally about everything at all times.  Except there is one problem with the picture as it leaves out a very important depiction.  The house that is on fire has people standing in front of it, preventing help from coming, threatening to harm the person putting out the flames, and they readily admit that once the flames are out, they are going to set it back on fire again.  By leaving out this addition, the cartoon is actually not true, but disguises itself as being a truthful metaphor for what's happening in today's society.

So what exactly am I driving at, you might be asking? Well, let's start by asking when do you normally see Black Lives Matter protest occur?  They seem to only occur when a white police officer shoots and kills a Black American.  These protests do not concern themselves with the most important of the questions which is why that seems to occur, but just the fact that it has occurred.  In disciplines such as Sociology, Public Administration, and Psychology, the "why" is the most important question.  Then the question begs, do the police just lie in wait to shoot unarmed Black men for sport?  The way the general media and Black Lives Matter portrays it, the answer would seem like "yes."  That mentality should bother the conscience of people who are watching the situation unfold.

Sheriff David Clarke, Milwaukee County Sheriff's Department (Wisconsin) chimed in on this issue and has even gone so far as to ask why do the police need to be fixed, why don't we fix society?  Like me, both Sheriff Clarke and I are black men who work in law enforcement.  I would surmise if you ask Sheriff Clarke about misdeeds in law enforcement, he would tell you that they do in fact occur, but killing black men just because the police can, is not one of them.  The question I would pose to any member of society and to any Black Lives Matter protester is, "could there be a correlation between the violent interaction between the police and potential black male suspects and the reason for the interaction in the first place?"

I turned to the FBI crime statistics for the past several years and I noticed a very disheartening trend within the Black American community.  While we make up roughly 13% of the U.S. general population, we take the lion's share of murder/homicide and violent crimes, about 52% on average (www.fbi.gov).  When you look at the stats for all the crime categories, a disproportionate number are being committed by members of the Black American community.  Okay, so the counter argument might be, "but just because a crime was committed, does not equate to a death sentence by the police."  Fair enough, but when you look at the FBI's law enforcement officers assaulted or killed stats (LEOKA), it shows that sadly, once again, black men are killing police officers at a rate outside and far above their percentage of the population.  Since 2005, in fact, Black Americans are responsible for killing 39.8% of law enforcement officers (224 of 563).  Again, I am suggesting there is a correlation.  It may be spurious as I have not had the opportunity to do a complete research paper on the subject, but there is something there.

But here is something that Black Lives Matter and the media never seem to acknowledge.  The vast MAJORITY of Black Americans each and every day have uneventful interactions with the police!  I have a correlative fact that might explain that.  People who do not violate the law, follow the instructions of police officers when detained, and do not attempt to commit violent acts against the police and society in general, do not suffer being killed by the police.  It actually is common sense.  Yes, I acknowledge that affluence, education, stratification, and institutionalization play a role, but again, we need to be honest and take some responsibility for our well-being.  So here would be something that Black Lives Matter could say to show that they truly believe black lives matter:

1. Encourage members of the black community to obey the law!
2. When detained by the police, follow their instructions.
3. If you disagree with the reason for being detained, the roadside is not the place to "make your stand."  That is what the court system is for.

Then BLM could start to demand equal treatment in areas of education spending and family planning so that young black children aren't starting life behind the eight ball.  Yes, there are a lot of things wrong with the criminal justice system in the United States, but oftentimes my fellow black men are playing a game where there is no way to win.  So don't play the game, but we in this country can ensure that the cards aren't stacked against these men either, I get that.  There are definite improvements that can be made.  However, demanding that each and every time a law enforcement officer, or only white ones, has to take deadly force action, must equate to a murder charge; that is not justice either.  There has to be accountability on both sides, and as it stands right now, the only ones being asked to be responsible is law enforcement even though they are reacting very quickly, in a constantly changing environment, to something the suspect did.  That is why the Supreme Court in Garner stated that the officer's actions had to be reasonable without the benefit of hindsight.  In that respect, we in the black community have to be reasonable in our interactions with the police.  Many years ago, Chris Rock did a parody on this subject, and while back at the time, we all thought it was pretty funny, it actually has come to pass that people are ignoring the most basic common sense rules of police interaction.   

Before I close this blog, please keep in mind that Black Americans, especially unarmed ones, still only comprise a small portion of the number of people killed by law enforcement and that the majority of us black men are killed by other Black Americans.  If we truly want to make changes, family, education, and following the rules/law might be one place to start.  I know it is much more complicated than that, but it's where we need to start to make the change.  Like the cartoon I shared at the beginning of this blog, let's not leave things out that don't fit our narrative.  Thank you for reading, and at least consider my stance on this subject.  There is quite a bit of research that needs to be done on this topic and much more than I can address in a blog.

   

Confederate Flag, Right, Wrong, or Indifferent

Fig. 1 First Confederate Flag (Stars & Bars)

Good Day Blog Readers,

I'm sure many of you have at least heard about the debate back and forth regarding the Confederate Flag and the controversy surrounding where and when it should be used.  I'm not going to try and convince anyone about how they use the flag, but I wanted to make sure that everyone is on the same page about the deeper meaning of the debate and the history surrounding the Confederate Flags.  I think many times people let personal feelings and unfounded opinions cloud what is really going on.  Two important things to point out is one, I do not believe everyone who flies a Confederate Flag is racist.  That is a silly notion.  Secondly, the image or symbolic nature of the flag does not and should not have any power over anyone who opposes it.  With that being said, let's begin.

Fig. 2 Second Confederate Flag (Stainless Banner)

Okay, Fig. 1 above right, is the first Confederate Flag known as the "Stars and Bars" that flew from about 1861 to about 1863.  It represented the original 7 states that broke away from the union at the start of the Civil War.  Fig. 2, was the second Confederate Flag designed by William T. Thompson and is known as the "Stainless Banner."  It took this design because during battle, it was hard for soldiers to tell the difference between "Old Glory" and the "Stars & Bars."  However, it had a fatal design flaw.  White flags in battle signal surrender, and during battle, raising of the Stainless Banner was often construed as surrender.  The Confederacy took a third stab at the flag and designed the "Blood Stained Banner" pictured in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3 Third Confederate Flag (Blood Stained Banner)

The addition of the red stripe at the far end of the flag helped resolve the "surrender" problem while still keeping the cross design and the stainless white.  Now this is important to understand the historical context of these flags because the flag surrounded in current controversy was never an actual flag of the Confederate States of America.  It was used by regiments of the CSA Army under such units as the Army of Tennessee and was designed by William Porcher Miles in 1862.  Interestingly enough, the flag we are all debating over was

Fig. 4 Present Day "Rebel Flag"

never approved by the CSA as the official flag.
So what is all the fuss about?

As you may or may not know, on June 17, 2015, nine members of the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church were killed during bible study by Dylann Roof.  Roof, of course, posted images of himself displaying the "Rebel Flag" as he talked about his race war.  Minorities saw this act and the display of the flag as yet another attack on racial equality.  For many southerners, despite this despicable act, they say the "Rebel Flag" is a representation of "Southern Heritage" and most national polls seem to support the public view that the flag represents "Southern Heritage."  The problem is there are historical facts that dispute that fact and to ignore these facts whitewashes what the flag actually means.  Secondly, the debate is not about attacking "Southern Heritage," it is about what ideologies our government supports.  So we have to bring these things into perspective.

Recall that the "Rebel Flag" was designed by William Porcher Miles who, according to historical documents, was a staunch supporter of slavery seeing it as a "divine institution"in which all men are not created equally. He wanted desperately to return to the slave trade with Africa and as a U.S. House Representative, he wished to repeal any bill that would have abolished slavery. Okay, but enough about boring historical facts, what about the other Confederate Flag designer, William T. Thompson? Well, in his own words, "As a people, we are fighting to maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race; a white flag would thus be emblematical of our cause." Or how about, "Such a flag…would soon take rank among the proudest ensigns of the nations, and be hailed by the civilized world as the white mans flag." I know, those words are inflammatory, but they are what they are.

All right, let's pretend for a moment that those two men never existed, and the flag was truly designed to solely represent "Southern Heritage."  We are all still stuck with its resurgent use in the 20th century as a counter to the Civil Rights Movement.  Sen. James Strom Thurmond of South Carolina reverted to this flag flying over the  South Carolina State House in his resistance to end segregation.  Okay, never mind that, but then we are still stuck with everyone's favorite party crashers, the Ku Klux Klan, which also hijacked the "Rebel Flag" in addition to the Swastika in their quest for domination by the Aryan race.  

After all of that, the events of June 17, 2015 occurred and to many in this country, black and white alike, here we ago again.  But the issue is, the same divisive flag was proudly flying on South Carolina's government property. This prompted many to ask, with what the flag has historically meant, why is South Carolina endorsing it?  That spurred people into action to have the flag removed especially while the community mourned the loss of the nine members of the church shooting.  From that, other government entities were forced to ask themselves the same question.  "Why is a government for and by the people….ALL THE PEOPLE….flying a flag that represents the losing side of a war where the losing side thought black people to be inferior and they wanted to upkeep the slave trade?"  We were past that, weren't we?  Yes, there was more to the war than that, but that is a main sticking point.  That is why the flag was being asked to be removed.  It is not a government sanctioned flag and it symbolizes a reprehensible part of America's history that belongs in the past.  Please remove it from government/public owned property.  It is not an attack on "Southern Heritage," and if "Southern Heritage" is based on those principals, then there is a problem with "Southern Heritage."  You can't have it both ways by taking whatever good the flag represents and completely ignoring the bad.

The debate is NOT about Walmart, Amazon, Ebay, and others not selling the Confederate Flag.  These companies made their choices on what they believed is good or not good for their business.  I will admit the NASCAR removal was quite a surprise, but NASCAR is also a business that has people of many different races and backgrounds that enjoy it.  So I understand their business decision.

The Confederate Flag is not banned!  Banning the flag would mean that you could be arrested for possessing, transporting, or selling it which is not the case.  Any attempt to ban the flag should be vehemently opposed by everyone as an attack on our First Amendment right.  The government does not have First Amendment Rights, so understand the difference.  Yet, many seem to think it is banned.

And perhaps the biggest one that I see popping up a lot is that some say that removing the flag makes no sense because it does nothing to affect the status of minorities in this country.  Let me say, NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON OF COLOR EVER STATED THAT NOW THAT THE FLAG IS BEING REMOVED FROM GOVERNMENT PROPERTY THAT ALL OF OUR PROBLEMS WILL GO AWAY!  That is completely absurd.  In the black community, there are issues that go deeper and are more systemic than this flag controversy.  The flag controversy is about government ideology.  Does our government sanction division, segregation, racism, or any acts of violence carried out in the name of the flag?  I would argue no.  Therefore, it is only logical the flag be removed from government property.  There is nothing else to the debate.  By the same token, I believe the whole Dukes of Hazard rerun removal and removing the Rebel Flag from confederate battle sites is way over the top.  Some have confused two issues and are trying to make a one size fits all approach which is equally wrong.  

So if you are an ardent supporter of the flag, that is fine by me and most people.  Just please understand that while it may mean one thing to you, it means something completely different to others based on historical fact and recent events.  Moreover, the government should be in the business of equality; not flying divisive symbols of our past that no longer exist.