Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Why Judge Beaty should recuse himself
Topic Started: Mar 19 2011, 01:05 PM (3,753 Views)
Quasimodo

There are circumstances when it is proper for a judge to recuse himself:

Quote:
 
Johnson v. District Court, 674
P.2d 952 (Colo. 1984)

Where an attorney for one of the litigants
signs a verified affidavit alleging conduct
and statements on the part of a trial judge
which, if true, shows bias and prejudice or
the appearance of bias or prejudice
on the
part of the trial judge, it is an abuse of
discretion if that judge does not withdraw
from the case,
even though he or she believes
the statements are false or that the meaning
attributed to them by the party seeking
recusal is erroneous. In such a case, the
judge should not pass upon the truth or
falsity of the facts alleged in the affidavit,
but only upon the adequacy of the motion as a
matter of law.


In another case as reported in the Colorado Lawyer; Wright
vs. District Court, 16 Colorado Lawyer 541, March 1987 the court
ruled that:

The fact that Judge Goldsmith in his own mind
does not believe that he is prejudiced against
Wright and his firm does not prevent
disqualification if the motions and affidavits
reflect prejudice and an appearance of
impropriety.

The Supreme Court went on to say:

Once facts have been set forth that create a
reasonable inference of a "bent of mind" that
will prevent the judge from dealing fairly
with the party seeking recusal, it is
incumbent upon the trial judge to recuse
himself.
See People v. Botham, 629 P.2d 589,
595 (Colo. 1981); C.J.C. Canon 3(C)(1). A
trial judge must accept the affidavits filed
with the motion as true, even though the judge
believes that the statements contained in the
affidavits are false or that the meaning
attributed to them by the party seeking
recusal is erroneous. Johnson v. District
Court, 674 P.2d 952 (Colo. 1982).

C.R.C.P. 97 provides:

"A judge shall be disqualified in an action in which he is
interested or prejudiced,
or has been of counsel for any party,
or is or has been a material witness, or is so related or
connected with any party of his attorney as to render it improper
for him to sit on the trial, appeal, or other proceeding therein.


A judge may disqualify himself on his own motion for any of said
reasons or any party may move for such disqualification and a
motion by a party for disqualification shall be supported by
affidavit. Upon the filing by a party of such a motion all other
proceedings in the case shall be suspended until a ruling is made
thereon. Upon disqualifying himself, a judge shall notify
forthwith the chief judge of the district who shall assign
another judge in the district to hear the action. If no other
judge in the district is available or qualified, the chief judge
shall notify forthwith the court administrator who shall obtain
from the Chief Justice the assignment of a replacement judge."

We said in Johnson v. District Court, 674 P.2d 952 (Colo.
1984):

"Ordinarily, the question of whether a judge
should be disqualified in a civil case is a
matter within the discretion of the trial
court. In re Marriage of Mann, 655 P.2d 814
(Colo. 1982). However, where an attorney for
one of the litigants signs a verified
affidavit alleging conduct and statements on
the part of a trial judge which, if true, show
bias or prejudice or the appearance of bias
or prejudice on the part of the trial judge,
it is an abuse of discretion if that judge
does not withdraw from the case, even though
he or she believes the statements are false or
that the meaning attributed to them by the
party seeking recusal is erroneous.
In such a
case, the judge should not pass upon the truth
or falsity of the facts alleged in the
affidavit, but only upon the adequacy of the
of the motion as a matter of law.
'The motion
and supporting affidavit speak for themselves
and the only question involved is whether the
facts alleged are sufficient to compel the
judge to disqualify himself.'
Kovacheff v
Langhart, 147 Colo. 339, 343-44, 363 P.2d 702,
705 (1961). The motion and affidavits are
legally adequate if they 'state facts from
which it may reasonably be inferred that the
judge has bias or prejudice that will prevent
him from dealing fairly'
with the party
seeking recusal. People v. Botham, 629 P.2d
589, 595 (Colo. 1981)."



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Does Judge Beaty have associations which might interfere--or, more to the point,
merely APPEAR to interfere--with his ability to render an unbiased judgment in the lacrosse case?

The NAACP was a player in the lacrosse frame-up attempt. It is altogether possible
that the head of the NC NAACP, William Barber, might be called to testify.

Likewise, the special NAACP counsels in the case, Irving Joyner and Al McSurely, might
also be called upon to testify.

It is altogether possible that such testimony might incriminate various persons
in a conspiracy to frame innocent persons.

We can imagine that such persons would be more than anxious that any such case
should never be brought, or heard.

Judge Beaty is a lifetime member of the NAACP. (see post below on the NRA)

Because the NAACP was so involved in the case, it is necessary to
ask if the membership received any information about the case from the organization--
any letters, circulars, newsletters? If so, what was said?

Did Judge Beaty read the NAACP website, with its 82 points of contention?

Did he regard the NAACP as a particularly reliable source of information for matters
dealing with race in North Carolina?

Surely he heard about the lacrosse case; did he form any opinions about it? Did those
opinions change?

Has he ever had any professional or social contact with Barber, Joyner, or McSurely?

Has he ever attended any meeting, congregation, or association, in which the lacrosse
case was discussed? If so, what was said?

None of the above is intended in any way to impute the necessity of bias to Judge Beaty;
but in recusal motions, the standard is that it is even the mere appearance of possible bias which must be
avoided.

It would have been very difficult for any white judge in Alabama to have stood apart from the prejudices
of his community in the 1930s. Judge Horton was such a man, but he is honored and held up as an
example because his independent conduct is so rare.

Judge Beaty is part of a community which gave itself heart and soul to the prosecution
of three out-of-state students. How much pressure might he receive from that community
not to grant relief to the out-of-state students, when that might in effect be an indictment
of the way his own community reacted? (This was what Judge Horton had to do.)

We have no way to know what was in his mind during the year of the false prosecution;
nor afterward. However, we can ask whether his deeds give an appearance of bias.





Edited by Quasimodo, Mar 19 2011, 02:45 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Let us recall that the local community was entirely behind Nifong.

He was endorsed by the Committee on the Affairs of Black People:
Quote:
 

“Nifong wasn’t well known or popular with the local political groups,
Durham Voters alliance, Durham People’s Alliance, and the Committee
on the Affairs of Black People, and the Committee on the Affairs of Black
People is one of the most efficient political organizations in the United States.
They can endorse somebody and guarantee a certain number of votes, because
they literally hand out ballots to anyone who can vote and it works. The other
two organizations were very liberal. They didn’t care for Nifong. His chances
of being elected from the moment Freda [Black] said she would run were very bad…

“Nifong was able to get the Committee on the Affairs of Black People’s endorsement
because of the lacrosse case.”
He [Covington] said Nifong hung onto that case
and used it as his ticket to gain their support.”


If Nifong is indictable for his role in the lacrosse case, doesn't some of that
responsibility spill over to the Committee?

Might not members of the Committee be called upon to testify as to why they
endorsed Nifong--as a reason for explaining why Nifong continued with the case?

Is it likely that members of these powerful local entities wish to be placed in a bad light,
or wish to be called upon to testify as to their association with Nifong?


Quote:
 
Shortly after Nifong decided to run, he began reaching out to Simeon. He went to an NAACP banquet and crossed the room to extend his hand in peace to Simeon. On March 28—the day after Nifong first spoke out in the Duke case, publicly chastising the players for not coming forward to volunteer information about the alleged rape—Simeon told Nifong he would support him. He invited Nifong to speak at his church, Ebenezer Missionary Baptist, and introduced him to the African-American congregation as a man who had always been a "good prosecutor," but who, Simeon said he had recently learned, was also a "good man."

That was on April 9. A week later Simeon asked Nifong to go to court to relieve Kim of the obligation of paying the bail-bond fees, arguing that she was no longer a "flight risk." Nifong agreed, as did the judge. Simeon told NEWSWEEK he went before the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People, a very influential group, and urged them to vote for Nifong. Simeon says he has also been giving Nifong fashion advice, telling him to lose the plaid shirts and to start wearing black suits, light shirts and power ties. Women like power, Simeon says he told Nifong.



quotes from "A Race to Injustice", by Nader Baydoun, R. Stephanie Good, pp. 33-36


Again, how many of these people might be concerned about being called to testify about their
association with Nifong, their backing of Nifong,
and what Nifong may or may not have agreed to?

How many of them would want to exert pressure to avoid having to testify?

Edited by Quasimodo, Mar 19 2011, 01:36 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

How many other judges does Beaty know, or did he associate with, either
personally or professionally?

Are Judges Wagoner, Stephens, Titus, Hudson, Bushfan, Whichard, Morey, and Smith
concerned about having to testify?

Might not they convey that concern to a fellow judge, one who grew up in the NC system?

How many politicians (of Beaty's party) may be concerned about having to testify?

Might not they convey that concern to a fellow judge, one who grew up in the NC system?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Judge Beaty is not a robot, without feelings. He is not a drone.
He is not rendered a drone because he has donned federal robes.

He is a human like the rest of us. We actually demean
him and render him less than us if we pretend that he is not subject to
human feelings or responses.

It would be stretching credulity to think that he never
heard of the Duke case;

that as a North Carolinian he had no opinions about it

that as a member of the AA community he had no opinions about it

that as a member of the judicial community he had no opinions about it

that as a member of the local political establishment he had no opinions about it.

IOW, he is not a tabula rasa--a blank slate. He comes to the case, like any human,
with certain pre-set ideas and experiences behind him.

We cannot know what those were. We can only attempt to interpret them
by his actions.

Moreover, it is not his actual biases which may or may not be at issue here;
but the mere appearance of bias, which matters.

What have his actual deeds suggested to observers?

(His permitting Nifong to delay the courts with a ludicrous assertion of $180 million
in judgments--when no judgments had been issued and Nifong was arguing before
the court at the same time that he was immune to judgments)

(His intervening in the normal course of federal civil procedure to prevent discovery
among the parties.)

(His delay in rendering even simply decisions--nearly a year now and no decision
on whether to dismiss--which even lay readers here, who are not lawyers, can
understand and decide in less than an hour.)

All of his actions have had the actual effect--whether intended or not--of rendering
aid to the defendants, resulting in the destruction or loss of evidence against them
and in preventing them from having to testify under oath.

None of his actions have had the actual affect--whether intended or not--of
rendering aid to the plaintiffs.

All of his actions have had the actual effect--whether intended or not--
of vastly increasing the costs--both emotional and material--of the plaintiffs.

This was a case which tore North Carolina apart. It was the focus of international media
and saw satellite trucks parked hub to hub.

It is hardly likely that Judge Beaty had no opinion on the case, and no opinion about
the out-of-state white Duke athletes who were accused falsely of rape.

Whether he has been able to put his own opinions and experiences behind him or
not as he considers the current cases,

I submit that he has not given the appearance of having done so; in fact, all his
actions suggest only the opposite: that he is deliberately yielding to the
probable pleas of many of those from his own associates--both in his
social community and his professional community--that theses cases which
would reveal them in such a bad light, not be permitted to continue.

And because of that appearance, I strongly recommend that he recuse himself;
and that the cases be adjourned to another jurisdiction outside of North Carolina.
Edited by Quasimodo, Mar 19 2011, 02:48 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo


Judge Beaty grew up in NC in the era of segregation, and knew it firsthand, both as a child,
and even later, as it affected his professional career:

Quote:
 


http://www.civilrights.org/advocacy/letters/2005/the-nomination-of-terrence-boyle.html


The Nomination of Terrence Boyle

Advocacy Letter - 04/19/05

Source: Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
Recipient: Senators Specter and Leahy

The Honorable Arlen Specter
Chair
Senate Judiciary Committee
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

The Honorable Patrick Leahy
Ranking Member Senate Judiciary Committee
152 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senators Specter and Leahy:

On behalf of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR), the nation's oldest, largest and most diverse civil and human rights coalition, we write in opposition to the confirmation of Terrence Boyle to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

Judge Boyle's elevation would be devastating to civil rights jurisprudence within the Fourth Circuit and beyond. The Fourth Circuit is virtually the court of last resort for persons residing within North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, and Maryland. The circuit has more African-Americans living within its boundaries than any other circuit in the country and has one of the fastest growing Latino populations. Judge Boyle's record reflects a deep and abiding hostility to civil rights cases based on race, gender, disability, and age. His avid support of states' rights principles threatens the millions of Fourth Circuit residents who may need to rely upon federal civil rights laws for protection against discrimination.

Judge Boyle's twenty-year record on the district court indicates that he would move the Fourth Circuit only further to the philosophical right if he is confirmed. The Fourth Circuit is already an extremely conservative court on civil rights and Constitutional issues. The Circuit has been reversed by this Supreme Court for too narrowly construing civil rights laws, and has issued numerous opinions hostile to affirmative action, women's rights, fair employment, and voting rights.

Judge Boyle has been reversed by the Fourth Circuit in more than 150 cases, a remarkable number in and of itself. However, in dozens of these cases concerning civil rights and criminal justice, Judge Boyle has been reversed for failing to follow precedent or for too narrowly construing the Constitution or federal laws protecting individual rights and liberties. Given the Fourth Circuit's extremely conservative reputation, the nature and number of these reversals is truly extraordinary.

Terrence Boyle is a protege of former Senator Jesse Helms. Boyle was appointed to the federal district court by President Reagan in 1984, at the behest of Senator Helms. In 1991, President George H.W. Bush nominated Judge Boyle to the Fourth Circuit, but the nomination lapsed. In 2001, while Helms was still in the Senate, President George W. Bush renominated Judge Boyle to the Fourth Circuit.

No longer a Senator, Jesse Helms should not be awarded a living legacy on this circuit. Throughout the Clinton administration, Jesse Helms "stood in the courthouse door," blocking the desegregation of the Fourth Circuit, the last all-white circuit court in the country. By failing to give the approval that was required of home-state Senators, then-Senator Helms prevented Senate consideration of two African-American nominees from North Carolina, federal judge James Beaty and state appellate judge James Wynn. Helms held up Judge Beaty's nomination for four years by failing to give his approval, and the nomination finally lapsed. In 1999, President Clinton nominated Judge Wynn, but Helms refused his approval, and the Wynn nomination lapsed as well. Only after President Clinton bypassed the Senate by giving Roger Gregory from Virginia a recess appointment in 2000 was the Fourth Circuit finally integrated.

Throughout his stand against Beaty,
Wynn and others, Jesse Helms argued that the Fourth Circuit "did not need any more judges." In 1999, he even introduced legislation (S. 570) to abolish two of the fifteen judgeships. In 2000, with ten judges on the Court, Jesse Helms was still of the view that the Fourth Circuit did not need additional judges. . .

In his twenty years on the bench, Judge Boyle has promoted "states' rights" at the expense of federal authority to protect civil rights.

(snip)

r

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 


http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/091050.P.pdf

(snip)

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

H.B. ROWE COMPANY, ü
INCORPORATED,
Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.
W. LYNDO TIPPETT, individually; P.
E. LEN A. SANDERSON,
individually; [et al]


Defendants-Appellees.

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND
EDUCATION FUND, INC.,

Amicus Supporting Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge.
(5:03-cv-00278-BO)


Argued: March 24, 2010

Decided: July 22, 2010

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and
James A. BEATY, Jr., Chief United States District Judge
for the Middle District of North Carolina,
sitting by designation.



Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded by published
opinion. Judge Motz wrote the majority opinion, in which
Judge Beaty concurred. Judge Niemeyer wrote a separate
opinion concurring in the judgment. Judge Beaty wrote a separate
concurring opinion.

COUNSEL

ARGUED: Ralph William Kasarda, Jr., PACIFIC LEGAL
FOUNDATION, Sacramento, California, for Appellant.
Christopher Grafflin Browning, Jr., NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellees. ON BRIEF: Kevin Van Parsons, SMITH, PARSONS
& VICKSTROM, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina;
James S. Burling, Sharon L. Browne, PACIFIC LEGAL
FOUNDATION, Sacramento, California, for Appellant. Roy
Cooper, Attorney General of North Carolina, John F. Maddrey,
Assistant Solicitor General, Tiare B. Smiley, Special
Deputy Attorney General, Elizabeth Leonard McKay, Special
Deputy Attorney General, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Joshua Civin, NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATIONAL
FUND, INC., Washington, D.C.; John Payton,
Director-Counsel, Debo P. Adegbile, Matthew Colangelo, Joy
Milligan, NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATIONAL


H.B. ROWE CO. v. TIPPETT
FUND, INC., New York, New York, for NAACP Legal
Defense and Education Fund, Inc., Amicus Supporting Appellees.


OPINION

DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judge:

(snip)

H.B. Rowe Co., Inc. ("Rowe"), a general contractor
owned and operated by a white male, submitted the lowest bid
on the project. Rowe’s bid included 6.6 percent women subcontractor
participation, but no minority subcontractor participation.
The Department rejected Rowe’s bid in favor of a
slightly higher bid, which included 9.3 percent women subcontractor
participation and 3.3 percent minority subcontractor
participation.

The Department denied Rowe the contract because Rowe
failed to demonstrate good faith efforts to attain the predesignated
levels of minority participation on the project.

(snip)


Third, the amended statute narrows the definition of "minority"
to encompass only those groups that have suffered discrimination.
The statute had previously defined "minority" to
include, among others, African Americans, Hispanic Americans
Portuguese Americans, Asian Americans, American
Indians, and Alaskan Natives. See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 13628.4(
c) (1989) (incorporating definition of "minority" contained
in 49 C.F.R. § 23.5(i) (1989)).

The amended statute
replaces this list by defining "minority" as "only those racial
or ethnicity classifications identified by [the] study . . . that
have been subjected to discrimination in the relevant marketplace

and that have been adversely affected in their ability to
obtain contracts with the Department." N.C. Gen. Stat. § 13628.4(
c)(2) (2010).

(snip)


BEATY, Chief District Judge, concurring:

I concur fully in the majority opinion in this case, and I
agree wholeheartedly with the conclusion that the North Carolina
Minority Business Enterprise Program, N.C. Gen. Stat.
§ 136-28.4, is constitutional on its face and as applied to African
Americans and Native Americans.
I add only a few additional
observations.

First, I am compelled to note that, in my view, the inequities
that are still evident in public contracting with respect to
African American subcontractors are a present reminder of
past racial discrimination in North Carolina, racial discrimination
that included not only enslavement and the denial of full
personhood under the Constitution in the past, but that also
included legally sanctioned exclusion from the most basic
rights of citizenship within not-too-distant memory. See
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S.
265, 387-396 (1978) (Marshall, J., dissenting) (surveying the
history of racial discrimination in this country and the
Supreme Court’s role in sanctioning that discrimination in
Plessy v. Ferguson).

In light of this history, the present disparities
in public contracting could not be viewed as the result
of non-discriminatory market forces, nor could the statistics
showing the exacerbation of those disparities when the Program
was previously suspended be viewed as reflecting a fair,
competitive status quo. Instead, in the context of history, these
disparities reflect the present effects of past discrimination,
and the State has recognized this, as discussed in the majority
opinion.

In my view, the Program enacted by North Carolina
serves the highest interest of the State in attempting to remedy
this past discrimination and is fully consistent with the promise
and purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment. Although
there is expectant hope that at some point the Program will no
longer be necessary to redress the present effects of this history,
we cannot deny the history of discrimination or its lingering
effects.


Finally, I would note that the majority opinion has held that
the Program is unconstitutional as applied to Hispanic Americans
and Asian Americans
, based on the lack of statistically
valid information presented by the State as to these groups.

However, as noted in the majority opinion, the State may, in
the future, include these groups within the Program if the
State undertakes additional study and determines that inclusion
of these groups in the Program is warranted.

Likewise,
the majority opinion has held that the evidence presented by
the State would not establish a sufficient basis to justify the
Program as to nonminority women,
even using intermediate
scrutiny. However, the State may very well include nonminority
women in the Program in the future if sufficient basis
exists, and in making this determination, the State may consider
any underutilization of nonminority women that occurs
in the absence of the Program.

Therefore, I am pleased to concur fully in the majority
opinion in this case.


Edited by Quasimodo, Mar 19 2011, 02:17 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
First, I am compelled to note that, in my view, the inequities
that are still evident in public contracting with respect to
African American subcontractors are a present reminder of
past racial discrimination in North Carolina, racial discrimination
that included not only enslavement and the denial of full
personhood under the Constitution in the past


This is a incorrect. The question of what was owned when one owned a slave--
his person, or his labor--has existed since antiquity. Some Romans asserted
a slave was 'property' with no rights--"a tool with a voice". Others had different ideas.

When the US Constitution was written, express care was taken to avoid using the words "slave",
or "slavery". Instead, a "person in the condition of servitude" was used--
expressly to indicate that slaves were "persons", not property ("tools").

This was considered a major victory for the anti-slavery faction.

(Note that when the Confederacy wrote its own constitution, it reversed this and
reintroduced the use of "slave").

To avoid giving slave states more votes in Congress than necessary, a compromise
was accepted in which these admitted "persons", whose care was in the keeping
of their masters, would indeed be represented, but only to a reduced degree.

But it is mythical (and injurious to the memory of those who fought the anti-slavery battle)
to say that the result the attained
did exactly the reverse.

As a scholar of law, Judge Beaty ought to know the difference.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 

As a scholar of law, Judge Beaty ought to know the difference.


If Judge Beaty can appear to succumb to modern day rhetoric about the issue,

and also decide that NC legislation can under the US Constitution affirmatively promote some minorities
at the expense of other minorities (see his decision above), then

what might his opinion be about whether or not white Duke lacrosse players can
form a group which can claim the protection of civil rights laws?

And if he cannot give the appearance of being able to be fair and unbiased
in deciding such an issue, ought not he to recuse himself?
Edited by Quasimodo, Mar 19 2011, 02:36 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

To make the matter more clear, make a substitution:

Quote:
 
Does Judge Beaty have associations which might interfere--or, more to the point,
merely APPEAR to interfere--with his ability to render an unbiased judgment in the case?

The NRA was a player in the case. It is altogether possible
that the head of the NRA might be called to testify.

Likewise, the special NRA counsels in the case might
also be called upon to testify.

It is altogether possible that such testimony might incriminate various persons
in a conspiracy to frame innocent persons.

We can imagine that such persons would be more than anxious that any such case
should never be brought, or heard.

Judge Beaty is a lifetime member of the NRA.

Because the NRA was so involved in the case, it is necessary to
ask if the membership received any information about the case from the organization--
any letters, circulars, newsletters? If so, what was said?

Did Judge Beaty read the NRA website, with its 82 points of contention?

Did he regard the NRA as a particularly reliable source of information for matters
dealing with gun rights in North Carolina?

None of the above is intended in any way to impute the necessity of bias to Judge Beaty;
but in recusal motions, the standard is that it is even the mere appearance of possible bias which must be
avoided.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

If Judge Beaty were to serve on a jury about the case, what questions
would he be asked on voir dire?

("Have you heard about the case?" "Do you know anyone involved in the case?"
"Has anyone expressed an opinion to you about the case?" "Did you have an opinion about the case?"
"Have you discussed the case with anyone?"
)

Since Judge Beaty is in effect serving as a juror, isn't it fair to ask him these
questions

and if he has any positive response at all,

to ask for a new judge?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://www.jtbf.org/index.php?src=directory&view=biographies&srctype=detail&refno=35


James Arthur Beaty, Jr. has served his profession, his state, and his nation with distinction as a jurist, public servant, and civic leader. A political science and history major, Beaty graduated with honors from Western Carolina University in 1971. While a student at Western, he was a three-year letterman on the football team; president of the Political Science Association; a founder of Black Students United for Liberation, the university*s first organization for African-American students; and a member of the Men*s Leadership Honorary Society.


It says nothing that in his youth he was something of a committed radical; Clarence Thomas was also something
of a radical when he was young.

But if your entire life is spent in the maelstrom of the 1960s (era) civil rights movement; and to an extent
your identity is molded by that; then

to what extent can you be not be sensitive to (hypothetical) pleas from the NAACP, and other established black
political organizations--"Don't destroy us. Don't drag us through the mud. Don't allow our names to be sullied. Don't side with
the other side." ?


We know there are justice department civil rights division lawyers who will not hear cases involving white voter rights
if it means investigating blacks. Perhaps this may be understandable in a human being (although it is not permissible
in a federal bureaucrat).

Can we know what is in Judge Beaty's mind or how he might react to seeing established black organizations
having to be hauled before a court to testify about wrongdoing against out-of-state privileged white students?


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

speeches of militants circa 1971 (?) during "Counter-orientation week"--not sure where; but
they give the flavor of the times:


Quote:
 

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:qfCkpPrBoB8J:www.africanafrican.com/negroartist/fbi%2520files/bpanther5b.pdf+%22Black+Students+United+for+Liberation,%22&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com



RE: COUNTERURIENTATION WEEK

(snip)

If we are going to sit here and say that these damn slave owners such as GEORGE WASHINGTON and ABRAHAM LINCOLN, and THOMAS JEFFERSON, and various other racists, out and out low—down racists, are our heroes, if -these are the people we're going to pick for heroes, if we're going to tell black kids that they must memorize the list of the presidents of the United States, then what we're telling them that they're doing actually is memorizing, I suppose there may be some benefits to this too, memorizing from the main perpetrators of the very oppression that we are faced with today. This kind of thing has to be turned around. We got to come to see that when we look at history we got to select as heroes those people who have, infact, given their lives for the liberation of black people in particular, and for the advancement of humanity in general. And that is not GEORGE WASHINGTON, that is not ABRAHRM LINCOLN, thatis not WILLIAM MC KINEY or TEDDY ROOSEVELT. I got serious questions about FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT or KENNEDY pretended and didn't make it.

And NIXON don't even pretend. Okay, now finally, and this is the last point I want to make here, I certainly want to point out that what it meant when we moved from a uni-dimensional thing is that we did have to raise broader social questions now. We couldn't limit ourselves with the race thing. No have to deal with the capitalism and what it means and that sort of thing. Middle-classism or white-classism, or whatever that sort of stuff may mean, and that kind of thing. Andthe whole variety of questions. And I think that these people who are so apt to criticize what they call black studies are really missing the point. Black people are saying that we are going to raise questions from the point of view of the black perspective and every field in which we operate, be that field history, where it's fairly easy, orpolitical science or sociology or be that field geography, Or whatever the case may be. The question will be raised from thepoint of view of the black perspective. Or be it space technology as the case may be. There are important questions here. Thereare important questions that we will have to try to generate ourselves, and we, in fact, insist that these kinds of questions be raised. Now that we have moved from that other notion, now that we know it's not a matter of change in RICHRRD NIXON'S heart, we know now that we can start dealing with the fundamental,structural characteristics of this country.

(The following introductory coments were made by ADCLPH REED.) Two very brief announcements: one is that the earliestspeaker this evening, two of the speakers will be here tomorrow night. They will be here showing a film called "American Revolution II," that's BILL FESPERMAN and CRAIG HALDEN. And with them will be BOBBY LEE from the Illinois Black Panther Party. And they will show the film and discuss it afterwards. That's tomorrow evening at 7:30 here. The other announcement is that after the talks areover and we begin a question and answer period, some people willpass through with collection buckets. This money will be usedto defray the cost of our speakers and to help with the work thatthey are doing at Malcolm X University, Malcolm X Liberation University, I'm sorry.The topic for this evening is an attempt to bring the discussion of this afternoon on the black liberation struggle to the local level and to discuss the matter of the black liberation struggle in North Carolina, what is happening. And the two speakers that we have here this evening may be supplemented by some more a little later on.

Our two people have been involved in this struggle,at least as long as I've been in North Carolina, which is three years. CHUCK HOPKINS, a former leader of Duke Afro-American Society, and currently with Malcolm X Liberation University, and HOWARD FULLER, and there are a lot of formerlys here, but most recently with the Foundation for Community Development, and now with Malcolm X University. I guess that's really all the introduction these speakers need, and I'll turn it over to them.

(The following speech was made by CHUCK HOPKINS.) well, HOWARD and I have decided to divide this thing up into, you know, into two sections. And he's going to deal with the black liberation struggle in North Carolina as it relates tothe black community. And I'm going to do a thing on, you know, on what we're trying to do on the campuses.

Starting out in dealing with the campuses, we have to first of all, you know, look at what education is all about in this society or any society. You have to recognize first of all that education has two primary roles. One is that it passeson the culture and the customs and so forth of the society to the younger members. The second role of education is that it provides the skills for the younger members to deal with the problems that they have to confront in society. In-a particular situation of black people being in a colonized situation in relationship to the overall society, wefind ourselves in a very unique position in that as far as black people are concerned, our most desparate need is one of liberation.We are faced with the question of asking the oppressor to provide us with the education to relieve us of our oppression. We've come to realize that this will not come about. Education in racist and capitalist America does not teach black people hoato deal with the problems that originate from racist capitalist America. We have to recognize this. In the last couple of years the efforts as far as what black people have been doing on the campuses have been centers around the goal of a lot of other struggles throughout the nation.There are black studies, trying to introduce black studies into the curriculum. From my experience at Duke I learned, you know, one important lesson about trying to introduce black studies into the curriculum, particularly on predominantly white campuses. At Duke, you know, we had the usual list of demands, abouttwelve demands,one very important one being for an institution of a department of black studies. The key question of black studies in mind was forsome semblance of control for black people in the program. This was the key issue. This was the issue that forced us to do a lot of other things, you know, after we left the Allen Building.After we came out of the building, you know, took the building and came out. The subsequent renigging on this particular issue of control forced us to go into a lot of other things.

But the important thing that we learned was that the administration was willing to give us all kinds of things, you know, as far as courses. They had a thing about three inchesthick, you know, paper to run down program to implement for us. But the key question of control, they don't want to deal with. So we found out that we couldn't go along with that and subsequently we got into a lot of other things. To understand why we couldn't go along with that, Iguess I have to talk about what we mean by black studies, or black education, because, you know, that's what we are talking about. Black studies kind of limits the thing, kind of sets it off, you know, in a corner. But we are really talking about an in-depth systematic black education program, which because of our situationin society, will have to of necessity come from a revolutionary base to deal with the problems that we're facing.

So again, we face the simple thing of awaiting DUKE, which especially in this area represents the vastness of racism and oppression in this area. DUKE is one of the key people who runs the town of Durham and the surrounding area. And so we were faced with, you know, asking these people to provide us with the tools for liberation. No, this wasn't to be. So the next thing that we decided to do was that a counter-institution was necessary if we were to get the correct kind of education that we wanted to deal in. The idea for Malcolm X Liheration University evolved from this.

Malcolm X Liberation
University represents independent effort on the part of someblack people to establish a real, relevant, educational program, to deal with the real problems that face black people in the society.I wish to stress that because of our condition, this program of - necessity has to issue from a revolutionary base. The efforts generally in North Carolina as far as studentsare concerned have been to establish e kind ef ene-ness, e kind eftogetherness with the black community. This has been exhibitedin the last couple of years in the Orangeburg situation when three brothers were murdered in Orangeburg, South Carolina, and subsequently coordinated action was developed in North Carolinawhen approximately eleven cities had happenings. You know, we were developing the thing that if it happens to one, then you deal with all. Another example of this might be the situation at A and T University in Greensboro which occurred last spring. This was a situation wherein some brother sat Dudley High School in Greensboro were, a brother happened to be a member of a quote unquote black militant organization, and therefore, he was not allowed to run for Student Council President.But he won on write-in votes anyway, but you know, the principal wouldn't let him, you know, take office. So, sisters and brothers over at the high school, they had a thing going on and they moved that thing over to A and T, and they had a thing over at A and T.It blew up into an armed military action against the pigs in Greensboro when the brothers held off the biggoty governor ofNorth Carolina, the Southern governor of North Carolina SCOTT's forces for two nights in a row. And then in a very beautiful guerrilla fashion when the pigs tried to swoop in at dawn, the brothers, like all guerrillas,split. Nothing was there, nothing but some dummy ROTC rifles. And the pigs . . . So you can see in a situation like that that the struggle has advanced to a different level. I think that the next go-round you're going to be seeing very few people, you know, sitting in buildings, taking over buildings, you know, placing themselves in positions where they would be sitting ducks for racist cops tocome in and bludgeon them and shoot them. That the next go-roundis going to definitely be a more intensified struggle and definitely on a higher level. I think that another thing that came out of that A and T thing was that on the night SCOTT sent his National Guard in because they were frustrated in not finding anybody in the building, they went about, you know, their lawful duty to destroy the property of the brothers, like TV‘s and stereos and so forth, you know, that they had in their rooms. The rooms were shot up. Each of the locks in Scott Hall were shot off the doors, you know,like somebody was in there so they had to shoot the locks off.And the State Government refused to pay for this. SCOTT and his boys refused to pay for this, and th administration of A and Thas got to get the money of some kind to paint all those rooms and so forth.

So SCOTT at a big dinner recently where he invited all the presidents of the student bodies to come in and talk, the brothers got together and said which was a good thing in that you just don't forgive certain to you. _Another thing that's in North Carolina has been the they were going to boycott him,it showed SCOTT that you know,things, you know, that people do been going down with black students Black Students United for Liberation. This is a state-wide organization of black students, both high school and college. It's two years old about a year and a half ago, I believe.old now. Again, efforts here have been now. It came into being It's about two years to, you know, coordinate some of the things that are going to have to go down in this state before black people can really advance any significant degree to deal with their problems. Another thing that I would like to get into a little bit concerns the future view, or look at the future as far as black students are concerned in North Carolina. And this has to be like a temporary view because we are changing pretty fast. I think that coming down on us, you know, we can see'day to day. SCOTT and forces have just riot laws and so forth that they passed recognizing that things the oppression that has been that it's increasing from released a new batch of in June which kind of tightens up things. So, you know, the oppression is really increasing, so when you talk about the future, you know, what we're going to be doing in the future, it's kind of, you know,you have to look at it temporarily, because things are changing pretty fast. One of the things that we've had to deal with again isthis black studies thing. And I think that in the future people
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:dTm1hVCurDcJ:www.greensborotrc.org/barnes.doc+%22Black+Students+United+for+Liberation,%22&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

Claude Barnes, PhD
Public Hearing #1 of the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission
July 15, 2005 Greensboro, North Carolina

Transcript

(snip)

When we go back and look at what happened in ’69, an event that involved the entire Greensboro Police Department as well as 650 National Guard troops to put down a rebellion by a group of unruly high school students as we were described, but more importantly to put down an angry, fed up disaffected African American community. In some sense when I think about how I’ve titled this talk and how I’ve written and published material in the past, I want to go back and revise that because it wasn’t an A&T student revolt. It was an African American student revolt, it was an African American community revolt because the grievances were deep and long and in some senses they are still heart felt. I find it interesting and somewhat disgusting really that Morningside Homes no longer exists. I mean I appreciate Willow Oaks, but what happened to Morningside Homes. It was almost as if we don’t want to…we want to sweep that legacy away from our memory. But Morningside Homes had a positive history. There were a number of people who grew out of Morningside Homes. In fact, someone wrote in my blog that why we always talking about we from Morningside Homes? Well some of us are so proud to be from Morningside Homes and one other point I would like to make is that I grew up on 17A Jennifer St. in Morningside Homes. ANd the 1979 incident took place less than two blocks from where my mother lived at the time. So in my estimation, I’m still traumatized by this event. I’m traumatized because some of the people that got killed of course were friends of mine. But more important than that, an entire community was traumatized and the city has not made any kind of effort as far as I know to come to some justice about the injustice that was done to the entire community.

I’ll forego the discussion about the Greensboro Four but one of the missing pages in the Civil Rights Movement also concerns the role of African American women which continues to get swept under the rug for some reason. When I look at these histories that Chafe and others have written, I’m very much appreciative of what has been written, but then a lot more needs to be written about Sandra Philpott, about Gladys Robinson, about these other unsung heroes like Joyce Johnson, for example, who played leadership roles in so many ways behind the scenes. Without their participation you would not have had a successful struggle as far as at least Dudley’s concerned and certainly as far as the city movement is concerned in many respects. At any rate, the civil rights protests change American society, Jim Crow laws are abolished, the civil rights act of ’64 is passed, the voting rights act of ’65 is passed. Public accommodations are open to Blacks; the poverty rate drops significantly; these are all amazing accomplishments of a national movement. But they are also important because the national movement received a lot of direction and impetus right here from Greensboro, NC. But even so, despite those improvements racial inequalities still persist in all these spheres of American life so there is a lot of work that still needs to be done. One of the ideological perspectives that tried to fill the void was what we called the Black Power perspective which was another phase of the civil rights movement where Malcolm X begins to articulate the ideology of Black Power and under the leadership of Stokely Carmichael, organizations like SNCC (Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee) begin to move away from the civil rights perspective to a more militant Black Power perspective and we begin to see that o n t he James Meredith march against fear in June 1966 when Willie Ricks stepped on top of a stand and the phrase was “Beep beep bang bang Umgawa Black Power.” THe next thing you know there were black power organizations thousands of them all across the United States including places like Greensboro, which created an organization called the Greensboro Association of Poor People in 1968 to respond to Stokely’s call.

Black students of course began to take over and protest the lack of consideration for African Americans in the educational system. In fact one of our local activists, Ed Whitfield, was instrumental in playing a major role in trying to get Black studies on predominantly white campuses. Now of course this is old news. Almost every major predominantly white institution of higher education has a Black studies program, but what is interesting to me is that so many historically Black colleges and universities don’t have a Black studies program. That’s a contradiction which still makes no sense, but at that particular time we did have an organization called the Student Organization for Black Unity (SOBU) which was created in Greensboro in A&T’s student union of May 1969 that was discussing these kinds of issues. And in fact one of the projects of the student organization for Black Unity was to create what they called the Save and Change Black Schools Project where they talked about it’s a need to go beyond something called Black Studies but talk about the reconfiguration of Black education period. And of course this is what led to the creation of the Malcolm X Liberation University which grew out of a struggle for quality education at Duke University. Malcolm X Liberation University, the African Liberation Support Committee, which was also created in Greensboro in 1972, the African World Newspaper which was housed right there on McConnell road in the old Sebastian House, the Student Organization for Black Unity, which I already mentioned, the Foundation for Community Development which came out of Durham, NC, but which was one of the first anti-poverty organizations in the state, and also I would mention that North Carolina group of Nationalists and Progressives who were also connected to the growth of activism from the standpoint of being involved with organizations like the Revolutionary Workers League, the Workers Viewpoint Organization and then the Communist Workers Party. Those same individuals were responsible for the creation of organizations like the Black Students United for Liberation, and the North Carolina Black Political Assembly which in the 1970s helped produce the groundwork for one of the greatest political conventions that’s ever taken place in the history of America and that was the Gary Convention which tried to create a third party or a Black political party in America because neither the Democratic Party or the Republican Party were providing any kind of leadership or any kind of justice if you will for the concerns of African Americans.

So it is not amazing to me and it certainly was not amazing to William Chafe in his book when he called Greensboro/Durham the center of the Black Power movement in the South. In the context of all that, we will begin to see urban rebellions take place. In 1968, the city had an urban rebellion. And then in May of 1969, there was a student council election at all-Black Dudley High School and one of the candidates, one Claude Barnes was excluded from the ballot for being subversive. And what does subversive mean? It meant that he knew Nelson Johnson. It meant that he knew Lewis Brandon. It meant that he knew Joyce Johnson. It meant that he knew these other people who were trying to bring about social change in our community and therefore he was subversive.

The students of course exercised their first amendment rights to free speech and protest and of course being naïve young people we did not know that you can’t do that in America without being the victim of excessive use of force. And we were absolutely surprised and amazed that on a high school campus we were confronted with tear gas, riot gear, and beatings and we were all thrown in jail with knots on our head. Eventually of course we fell back to what we considered to be more friendly surroundings and that was North Carolina A&T State University which at that same moment the student organization for Black Unity was having its founding convention so every Black militant in the world was in this union. At that particular point in time a decision was made to stop the conference because something was happening to our young people. Our young people were out there demonstrating trying to exercise their fundamental so-called constitutional rights and they were being attacked unfairly and mistreated. So one of the points I’m trying to make is what happened in 1979 is not unique. It is not different it is part of a long history of exploitation and oppression that has taken place in our community. We should not be surprised although we are disappointed, but we should not be surprised. Again, officials blamed the whole protest on a group of outside agitators.

Now I was not an outside agitator; neither were my colleagues, but if you would look at the way that the media treated us you would think that we were a bunch of criminals, a bunch of agi…outside agitators whose only concern was to disrupt the public school system. In fact we were trying to improve the public school system. We were taking what we were learning seriously. We actually believed in something called democracy and we believed that we had a voice and we made a mistake because we were jailed for trying to exercise those beliefs. And worse than that when the A&T students tried to come and protect their younger brothers and sisters one student was killed. And whoever killed him has never been brought to justice and there were eyewitnesses who still believe to this day that Willie Ernest Grimes was gunned down by the Greensboro Police Department. There were eyewitnesses to that effect and this is one of the cold cases, one of the unsolved murders and then people don’t understand why some of us are upset. You can go back and look at the headlines, but I won’t to bore you with that. But this is what the students had to face. Simply from tring to exercise what they believed to be their democratic birthright we had to face excessive use of force. When the police came down at Dudley High School they gassed an entire community. Taking no consideration for the older people who were sitting on their porches trying to figure out what was going on or shooting at the students. I was shot at many times myself. It is amazing that more people were not murdered at that particular point in time. I’d like to stick this picture in here because of the kind of when you go back and look at the news coverage it is absolutely amazing to look at the news coverage and then to look at the people who were involved. We were high school students. We were young high school students and when I go back and look at where these people are now none of them are locked up in jail. They all have productive situations and I could go through that but that’s another story.

At any rate, the key point I’m trying to make here is that there’s a connection between ’79, ’69, 1960, 1955, however far you want to go back. People who stand up for social justice and righteousness get attacked by the government, by the Klan, and by all those who stand for reaction and the lack of progress. That’s not something that should be surprising to us, but it seems to me that here we are in 2005 and we’ve got to justify our actions for wanting to stand up for progressive social change. Occupying the moral high ground is not enough. If we are going to make democracy happen, it seems to me we gotta take it from the serial liars who are in control right now. Who are ready to take our young people to war on lies and kill our birthright, our young people, based on lies. Serial liars, that’s the only term I can use to describe the people who are in control of our so-called democracy right now. But things have got to change. Some of us are not afraid. Some of us have not recounted. Some of us have not repented. In fact, I may be a political science professor, but I’ve still got the same ideas I’ve always had since I first met Nelson Johnson. [applause]

To me, the history of the modern civil rights movement would not be complete until the story of the role of the Black power nationalists, the role of the North Carolina Nationalists and the connections between that struggle and what happened in Greensboro 1969 are made in a very profound way that our community understands and appreciates. If this Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission can’t do anything but provide a dialogue where that public space is available where we can in fact engage and learn from our recent history and connect that to our more longer view about historical development, then this will be all worth it. I think that is the best we can expect is to have a safe public space to try to come up with some kind of historical consensus to cure this self enforced historical amnesia and ignorance that keeps our community divided.

Thank you very much.

[applause]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

(cont.)

Quote:
 


AL: Thank you Mr. Barnes for your statement. And at this time, does any other Commissioners have any questions?

CB: For the record, I do want to leave these materials with somebody. I do have a published article that I wrote called “Bullet holes in the Wall: Reflections on the Dudley A&T Student Revolt of May ’69.” This is from a book that my colleagues and I put together sometime ago. I do have a thesis. I do have a…Lewis Brandon reminded me, this is his chart that tries to trace the organizational development that begins with the Foundation for Community Development in 1967 and ends with the creation of Communist Workers Party so that you can see the historical evolution of those organizations and those relationships. And I do have some other materials I’d like to leave with you as well. And again, thank you Commission, I thank you very much for the work that you are doing. This is very courageous and I dare say sacred work.

Cynthia Brown: Dr. Barnes, I just wanted to ask you. I’m sitting here and I know a little bit of the history, of the details. You gave a kind of broad brushed stroke about the Dudley incident and the elections. Can you give a little bit more detail about actually what happened there that led to the students marching and connecting with A&T students…let’s get that background for people who don’t really have that history.

CB: Okay, well essentially, to make a long story short, I was a high school student, a junior, running for Student Government Council President and the individuals who were in charge of the school at that time, I don’t want to call names because it’s probably not necessary, but they know who they were and are, but they took my name off the ballot because I was deemed to be a subversive individual. But the students decided to write my name in anyway, so when the election was held, I actually ended up with just about all of the votes, as it turns out.

I was still not allowed to take office, which was fine with me, but then some of my colleagues were telling me, look, this is not fair, it is not fair, let’s protest. so we decided to protest, we planned a protest that we were going to shut down the student assembly that was taking place, we were all going to walk out of the student assembly because they had called an assembly to explain why the election results were invalid. We passed out leaflets before and asked people to come out and boycott with us. And so we were expecting a big turnout. Nine people showed up for the protest. Nine people. And that’s just about how it was for a couple of days. But the nine people were committed we decided to protest in front of the school with signs. And of course someone felt that we were a nuisance. The police were called, we were attacked. And this is what really happened. when we were attacked, it just so happened that classes were changing at that particular point in time and our colleagues began to see how we were treated by the police and this led to other students really running to our support. And that’s what really escalated the affair into a back and forth civil unrest kind of incident. I could go on and on and on, but again I’ve written this up and I would refer you to the public record. To make a long story short, it was an incident that probably didn’t have to escalate and get out of control but it was the lack of respect for young people and their ability to take seriously a education that ultimately led to this kind of affair. That is on one side, the other side of course, there was a bias against radical politics and it was also a bias against low income people. I happened to be from the wrong side of town so some of that was in there also in the sense that there’s no one from my side of town had ever been a student government official before. And even though I was in the National Honor Society and a number of other things, they just would not allow it. But if you are really interested, and I did happen to bring along a number of pieces of documentary evidence. The demands that we raised at that particular point in time, I’ve got copies of those from the original documentation. I also have copies of a newsletter that we helped put out that the radicals put out. We did a letter to mom and pops from the Black radicals that we passed out to the Black community. And when I reflect back on this whole incident one of the points I want to make before I leave that I must make is that one of the things I think the individuals

I had the privilege of working with was most successful at was building broad based coalitions in the African American community. And that is probably what saved a lot of our lives because there were, we had deep support in African American community. We had support from ministers, from lawyers, from people from all walks of life. And of course there are some statements I could quote to you to back that up, but it is in the documentary evidence, but that is one of the things I think about when I think about that particular time frame is how people came to our rescue despite the beating we were taking in the press. We had our own press instruments. We had our leaflets, we had our newsletters, we had our community mass meetings, which were well attended and this is how we stitched our community together to go against the odds that were stacked up against us. I could go on, ma’am but I don’t want to take up the Commissioners time with that incident, but, so, I mean if there are other particular questions, I’d be glad to answer them.

MS: I would love to ask you to elaborate just a big more. You’ve introduced us to something that has captured my attention and that is the degree to which you had a depth of support in the African American community that kind of cut across all of the boundaries. To what extent was that support present or absent for the Workers Viewpoint Organization.

CB: That’s a good question. That’s a good question and you know, when you look at the movement, we started off as basically a grassroots organization, but it seems to me that the more we moved into radical politics we began to lose some of that support that began to happen for a variety of reasons. I think one of the reasons it began to happen is that it took us a while to get kind of reconnected to our grassroots. We kind of lost touch with the grassroots for a moment. Okay? I think that is one of the things that happened. I think though some major breakthroughs were about ready to be made in 1979. I think some major breakthroughs were about to be made as far as labor organizing. And as far as the support from the community is concerned, but we will never know because the corner was turned in such a tragic way. The way that, the way that they Communist Workers Party was broke up through armed violence, and I would say official armed violence because they had the sanction of the state.

The way that organization was broke up, I just call it a demonstration effect, the shock and awe effect that we are still feeling the effects from. This is what happens to people who get involved in progressive politics. Alright? And I think it was the threat of reconnecting with the grassroots, that the Communist Workers Party had that potential was really what got people’s attention. Something was going on in the textile mills of North Carolina and I have documented how difficult it was and is to work in those conditions. We call ourselves a democracy, but that democracy ends at the plant gate. You go work in the mill and the first thing you learn is that your supervisor is called an overseer. Something is wrong with that picture. You don’t have any rights when you go into that plant gate. And the textile workers of North Carolina are some of the most oppressed individuals and that’s what the individuals that I used to work with, the individuals I was associated with, that’s what we used to do. That statement is true that Paul Bermanzohn made…we work with the most oppressed, the wretched of the earth because no one else is paying attention and unfortunately that is where we are right now.

When I look at my society right now, this is what I see. A lack of care, a lack of attention to the least of these and I think this is what happens to those people who decide to go in that direction. If you take off the emperor’s clothes, the emperor gets upset and I don’t know what repercussions I will have for calling a serial liar a serial liar, but every time I get in public, this is what I have to say. We are being led by a president who is a serial liar on many respects. [applause] But at any rate, in answer to your question, it was not as deep as it used to be, but it was beginning to make inroads where it was, you know, it was going to make headway, or that was my estimation. But that is my estimation from afar because in ’69, no ’79 I had left Greensboro to go to Atlanta to attend graduate school, so I wasn’t involved in the organizing activity at that particular point in time. IN fact, I was scheduled to come home that weekend, but I had so much work to do I couldn’t justify coming home that particular weekend, and who knows? Who knows what the situation would be? But that is a good question. That is an excellent question.

Bob Peters: Dr. Barnes, you mentioned that people in Greensboro don’t want to talk about the social and political history of Greensboro, but I have a two part question. Would you comment as to why, number one? And number two, what benefits might arise if we did talk about that history?

CB: Well, you know Greensboro is just like Atlanta, a city I’ve spent some time in. And Greensboro and Atlanta both like to hype themselves. They have this image of themselves which is far from reality. You know, and the state too. We used to be called a New South state. Huh. We a New South state. We’re a New South State and at the same time, we’ve still got segregation going on. Do you remember what happened in Greensboro at the time of Brown vs. Board of Education was passed and people said, oh, we’re going to integrate right away. And then it took from 1955 to 1974 to you know, it took all that time, we took dragging and screaming into the future because our leaders here in this particular town believed their own press reports. There is something about the fabric of this place whereby the elite that makes the major decisions have one image of themselves and the city and the reality is something else on the ground. So, you know, you are bringing some attention to some uncomfortable truths and people don’t want to talk about those uncomfortable truths. But if you really want to be a community, if you really look at the definition of community, that means that you’ve got to pay attention to all aspects of that community. And if there is suffering in that community, you can’t be a good community if there is mass suffering in that community. How it is that you call yourself a community and you know that people in Southeast Greensboro are suffering? I can remember when my mother was working as a domestic servant and making $20 a week. That’s not no pay for no human being. I can remember with the blind workers were working in inhuman conditions making $1.06/hour. And that’s why people were motivated to get out and stand with the blind workers. They were motivated to get out and stand with the cafeteria workers. They were motivated to get out and stand against police brutality because nobody else was taking up these issues. So the leadership in Greensboro in my estimation does not want to confront its reality. It looks different on the ground. But we’ve got some nice buildings. We’ve got some nice restaurants downtown. But then we’ve got some neighborhoods where there are some serious problems. And nobody’s addressing those problems in a systematic and serious way. And that’s even less so today than it was in ’79 in my estimation. Does that help?

[laughter]

BP: Well, what benefits? Would you comment a little bit further on what benefits might arise if we did face that political and social…

CB: I thought that was implied in my answer, but I’ll be glad to elaborate. It seems to me that if we really concerned about community…if you really want to build community and the definition of community then you take care of the entire community and then you’ll see that when it comes time for a public sacrifice then everybody will get on board. But right now when this city asks my community to sacrifice to build a ballpark, I’ve got a problem with that. Because you haven’t done anything on my side of town. Alright? So if you want to build trust, then take care of the entire community. Do something about the least of these and then, you know, that may sound like a trite phrase, but growing up poor, I have very vivid memories of being poor. So I mean, you know, unless you, I don’t mean to say unless you’ve been poor, but you know you don’t have to have been poor to have compassion and sympathy for the poor. I hope you don’t have to experience that, alright, but I don’t want to go back to being poor again. I’m gonna work for the rest of my life to try to change that situation I’ll learn for myself before my colleagues and my brothers and sisters. That’s just the way that is. I think if more people felt that way, we wouldn’t have poverty in America. There is no reason for us to have poverty in this community. It’s ridiculous. All the wealth that’s generated in this community and there are still people that’s hungry? There are still people who have problems, drug problems. There are still people who are not sure if they can have lights on tomorrow because they are not making the kind of wages that they need to have a livable situation. How is it that you can work their fingers to the bone and still be below the poverty level in this community? To me, that is unconscionable and you call yourself a democracy and a community. You’re not a community, you are something else. You are a façade of a community. So if we are really serious about community, we’ve got to take care of those real world problems that people have. This is not theory. This is not theory. Now, anybody that knows me knows that that’s one of the reasons I start off any public discussion with first of all, my name is Claude Barnes from 17A Jennifer St., Morningside Homes, because that is basically who I am. That’s basically who I will always be. And I still know people who are friends of mine and if more people would be a little bit more compassionate to their brothers and sisters I think we’d be a lot…a lot longer. And what I’m saying is that the people who run my community don’t have that compassion. They’re more interested in the window dressing, you know having a nice sparkling ballpark downtown that you can take your rich people friends to, but you know a lot of my people can’t go to the ballpark. I don’t want to go to the ballpark because I can’t take all the people I would like to take. At any rate, that’s what I mean. We could have a much better place if we took community seriously and if we had that collective understanding of our history. If we had a collective and compassionate understanding that all of us are not sharing in this American dream. In fact, to many of us it is an American nightmare. And we haven’t woke up yet.

AL: Thank you, Dr. Barnes.

[applause]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply