by BAR executive editor Glen FordBarack Obama may be the most effective propagandist for U.S. imperialism in a very long time. But his narrative to Africans is built on blatant falsehoods, and his spiel to Black America is fundamentally dishonest and evasive. Demonstrators in Manhattan declared: “We will no longer tolerate a message from within our community, that the policies of Barack Obama cannot be criticized.”
Obama Lies on Two Continents, is Denounced in New York
by BAR executive editor Glen Ford
“Obama peddled his relabeled imperial snake oil to Blacks on both sides of the Atlantic.”
President Barack Obama tells essentially the same lies as his predecessors, but does it better. His deceptions are aided enormously by the willed receptivity of the desperately hopeful – and none are more eager to believe than Africans and African Americans. In July, Obama peddled his relabeled imperial snake oil to Blacks on both sides of the Atlantic. At the NAACP’s national convention in Manhattan, and before the Ghanaian parliament in Accra, Obama’s message was the same: There will be no redress of your historical and current grievances. Get over it.
Obama’s gall is boundless. When the accumulated facts of centuries stand in the way of his mythmaking, he conjures up counter-facts to fit a counter-logic. In order to shame Africa into holding still to be gang-raped of her resources – by now an almost 600-year agony – Obama invents a totally false history of South Korea’s economic rise. As the story goes, Kenya’s economy was larger than South Korea’s when Obama’s father came to the United States in the early Sixties. But the South Korean government, “working with the private sector and civil society, was able to create a set of institutions that provided transparency and accountability and efficiency that allowed for extraordinary economic progress,” said Obama. There “was no reason why African countries could not do the same.”
“Obama tells huge lies in order to advance U.S. policy goals.”
Of course, little of what Obama said about South Korea or Africa is true, and history provides plenty of reasons why African countries were not in a position to grow at anything like the speed of South Korea. In the real world, South Korea’s economic expansion had no basis in “transparency” or collaboration with “civil society.” As Thom Hartman explained in a July 14 article:
“This economic development of South Korea started following a military coup in 1961, where General Park Chung-Hee began South Korea's economic assent by implementing short-term plans for economic development. He instituted the Heavy and Chemical Industrialization program, and South Korea's first steel mill and modern shipyard went into production. In addition, South Korea began producing its own cars. Electronics, machinery, chemicals plants soon followed, all sponsored or subsidized by the government.”
A military dictatorship set South Korea on the path to industrial development at just about the time Obama was being born. The United States allowed its Korean satellite to protect and grow its fledgling industries as a capitalist showcase and bulwark against North Korea and communism in general. Today, South Korea’s economy is controlled by a tight circle of conglomerates.
Corruption is endemic. A former president committed suicide in May when he faced questioning in a $6 million bribery scandal – and that’s very small change by Korean standards. Obama is talking nonsense.
“He is arguing that Africans are suffering from some collective character flaw.”
Africa’s neocolonial masters would not tolerate a Black African nation that subsidized industries that might effectively compete with the U.S. and Europe – as South Korea does. The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, part of the economic arsenal with which Europe and America discipline uppity Third Worlders, have effectively proscribed Black Africa’s areas of acceptable growth – acceptable, that is, to the rich nations of the world.
We understand that Obama tells huge lies in order to advance U.S. policy goals, foreign and domestic. But his lies to Africans and African Americans are purposely cruel, designed to rub sensitive areas of Black self-esteem. When Obama says there is “no reason why African nations could not do the same” as his false version of Korea, he is arguing that Africans are suffering from some collective character flaw.
In the same way, Obama’s constant refrains about “good governance” are reminders of colonial-era white claims that Africans were incapable of governing themselves. They still sting. But, as Toronto-based activist/author Gerald Caplan wrote in the July 13 issue of The Nation, there is no factual basis for Obama’s assertion that "you're not going to get investment without good governance":
“That's just wrong. For decades most foreign investment in Africa has gone to South Africa first, even under apartheid, and then to such oil-rich nations as Angola and Nigeria. First and foremost, western companies, backed energetically by their embassies, are after Africa's resources--oil, gas and to a lesser extent minerals. These are the very sectors where we find vast corruption, environmental degradation, the vicious exploitation of African labor, and, often enough, Africa's wars. In no case does good governance play a role in investment decisions. Often enough venal leaders are precisely what investors look for.”
Obama turns truth on its head. His lies are aggressive, insulting, virulent – but effective, because they put the African audience on the defensive. Anxious about their own collective shortcomings, many fail to examine the illogic and pure fallacies of the American president’s nonsensical presentation.
False Empathy
Obama pulled a slick switch on the NAACP’s upscale crowd at the New York Hilton, last Thursday. The president spent an impressive amount of time itemizing the myriad ways that African Americans suffer disproportionately because of “structural inequalities [emphasis mine] that our nation's legacy of discrimination has left behind; inequalities still plaguing too many communities and too often the object of national neglect.” It was beginning to sound as if Obama was about to recognize the need to confront institutional (sometimes called “structural”) racism with targeted programs – something he has refused to do as a matter of core philosophical principle.
“Obama had shifted from a focus on particular Black grievances to the Reaganesque politics of 'a rising tide lifts all boats.'”
But of course, it was not to be. The president’s empathetic recitation of Black grievances raised expectations of an appropriate legislative and executive response – and a large segment of the crowd clearly believed they had heard Obama propose specific programs to confront these “structural inequalities” that plague Black folks. Then suddenly, Obama switched gears – and terminology. Structural inequalities would be tackled through “a comprehensive approach [italics mine] to ending poverty.” In Obama’s formulation, “comprehensive” means “general” – not targeted at any identifiable groups suffering from what “our nation’s legacy of discrimination has left behind.”
Without missing a beat, Obama had shifted from a focus on particular Black grievances to the Reaganesque politics of “a rising tide lifts all boats.” He would “lay a new foundation for growth and prosperity that will put opportunity within the reach of not just African Americans, but all Americans. All Americans.” And the crowd cheered, seeming not to realize that Obama’s peroration was actually a promise not to extend any special, programmatic help to devastated Black America. It was all about the rising tide, lifting everybody. “Of every race. Of every creed. From every region of the country. We want everybody to participate in the American Dream. That's what the NAACP is all about.” (Applause.)
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People roared its approval of their president’s pledge to do nothing special to advance colored people.
There are lots of ways to lie, and Obama seems to have mastered all of them. His performance before the NAACP’s centennial convention gave delegates the impression that he both recognized and would act to counter the effects of historically rooted, institutional (or “structural”) racism. He then used a terminological device (the word “comprehensive”) to retreat to “race neutral” territory without most of the audience noticing. It was high deception, the moral equivalent of a lie.
You Will Not Stifle Debate
“Crimes against humanity do not become OK because a Black man is presiding over these crimes.”
“We must not be discouraged because of our numbers,” said Nellie Bailey, of the Harlem Antiwar Coalition, standing on the Sixth Avenue sidewalk a block away from the New York Hilton Hotel, where President Obama was inside, wowing the crowd. Bailey and an assortment of perhaps 50 activists shared the corner with tourists and cops.
“There is an effort to silence us within our own respective movements,” said the veteran community organizer. “But Blacks and progressives are beginning to openly question Obama’s policies. We will no longer tolerate a message from within our community, that the policies of Barack Obama cannot be criticized.”
Despite the fraying of support for Obama on the Left, the July 16 event appeared to be the first public demonstration against the president, albeit a small affair. Turning toward the Hilton, Bailey shouted: “You will not stifle debate, discussion and analysis within our community. We are going to expose this imperialist for who he is.”
Carl Dix, of the Revolutionary Communist Party, took his turn at the mic. “They may put a Black man in the White House, but they’re not going to stop their cops gunning Black men down in the street,” said Dix. “Crimes against humanity do not become OK because a Black man is presiding over these crimes.”
Diop Olugbala, of the Uhuru Movement, possessed the most impressive anti-Obama credentials. On August 1 of last year, when most Leftists were busy acting like Obama groupies, Olugbala and a few others at an Obama rally in St. Petersburg, Florida, unfurled a banner that demanded “What about the black community, Obama?” Olugbala and the Uhuru crew verbally confronted the candidate, and clearly rattled him.
“Barack Obama has told us that racial oppression is no longer a significant factor in life,” said Olugbala, the last speaker at the demo on Sixth Avenue. “Obama is the new face, to seduce the world into compliance with U.S. imperialism.”
Comments
But the South Korean
But the South Korean government, “working with the private sector and civil society, was able to create a set of institutions that provided transparency and accountability and efficiency that allowed for extraordinary economic progress,” said Obama. There “was no reason why African countries could not do the same.”
top acne solution
Wall St. Barry's At It Again
Time to lock & load folks! If you stay ready you don't have to get ready! Otherwise enjoy your stay at the nearest FEMA camp(lmao)!
"The Pentagon Prefers Crisis," Kelly Vlahos
Kelley B. Vlahos, a Washington, D.C.-based freelance writer, discusses how the CIA successfully undermined Somalia’s Islamic Courts Union and created something much worse, the paltry U.S. troop contingent in Afghanistan compared to the 600,000 troops needed to pacify the country, the generally counterproductive Global War on Terror and how military failures become justifications for expanded and prolonged occupations.
MP3 here. (26:54)
Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, a Washington, D.C.-based freelance writer, is a longtime political reporter for FoxNews.com, a contributing editor at The American Conservative magazine and featured Antiwar.com columnist.
Interview by Scott Horton,
http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/24/kelley-b-vlahos-3/
II. Scott Horton interviews Roger Charles,
http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/07/24/roger-charles-2/
Roger Charles, a freelance journalist and investigator, discusses J.D. Cash’s pursuit of the truth in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, evidence that disproves Laurie Mylroie’s Saddam Hussein/imposter-Ramzi Yousef theory, the FBI’s numerous informants in Elohim City, the DOJ’s attempt to hide any mention of suspects other than Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols and the possible involvement of German national Andreas Strassmeir as an agent provocateur.
MP3 here. (42:12)
Roger Charles was a career Marine Corps officer and has worked as an investigative reporter for major media organisations and news programs such as as the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, Newsweek, U.S. News & World Report, the New Yorker, CBS 60 Minutes and Frontline.
"America, America, God shed his(?) grace on theeee.. And crowned thy good with brotherhood from sea to shining sea..."
Spreading "Democracy" worldwide "trying to get paid"
Raimondo, "The Honduran Coup and the Clinton Connection."
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/07/26/the-honduran-coup-and-the-...
"If you’re a Honduran general and you’re chafing at the bit to depose the duly elected president – as your predecessors have done repeatedly over the years – you don’t just go for it. That would be impolitic and eminently impractical: after all, the United States is not only your country’s number one trading partner, it is also the chief source of funding that keeps the Honduran military flush with so much cash that it is the fifth largest economic power in the nation. A cutoff of that all-important lifeline, not to mention trade sanctions, could put the squeeze on your finances.
So, before you make your move and call the troops out of the barracks, you let Washington know what you’re up to – you feel them out and get some idea of how they might react. There are plenty of indications that this is indeed what occurred, including talk of "negotiations" between the coup plotters and the State Department that failed to avert the "crisis." So while the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama has officially taken the position that the coup is illegitimate and President Manuel "Mel" Zelaya must be restored to office, there are hints that the U.S. is playing both sides of the fence – and even tilting toward the coup leaders. When Zelaya announced that he would cross the border between Honduras and Nicaragua on foot and called on his supporters to gather, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton denounced him as "reckless." Which led Zelaya to ask, in effect, which side is she on?"
..."So what we have is this: a powerful group within the Democratic Party, clustered around Hillary Clinton, actively pushing for the legitimization of the Honduran coup on behalf of their corporate clients – Chiquita, which has a long and dishonorable history in the region, and the Honduran association of big businessmen, who have long used the state as their personal instrument."
The dollar is a M******F******r, is'nt it?
What?!
July 22, 2009
Hello BAR,
The below was found at WWW.Counterpunch.org. It sounds again like someone else spending two thirds of the page defending and "Making Excuses" for their hero Obama. Why are'nt all the bold , difinitive political solutions with a concrete plan mentioned by the writer in his flimsy critique of the Times coverage of his NAACP adress. Also, he fails to mention where Obama remorsefully and I think condescendingly compared his safe, sweet upper middle class upbringing off the mainland with those Young Urban African American youth struggling against and sometimes giving in to the lure of the street life for lack of any decent prospects of earning a living By invoking that sentimental proverb:"OH, But for the grace of God go I."
And did anyone notice how the microphones were situated in a way that allowed Obama to appear to be speaking down to his audience ? It lent his admonishments and his more impassioned ( if that isn't stretching it) recitations an even more ominous quality; conveying the message: Make no mistake about it; he is the HNIC.
News Not Fit to Print?
Structural Inequality
By DEDRICK MUHAMMAD
Last week President Obama spoke boldly about persistent racial discrimination and criticized the "structural inequality" that presents "the steepest barrier" to African American equality in the 21st century.
Speaking before a crowd at the centennial convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, he highlighted the need for government action to help tear down these barriers.
So it was a surprise to see this headline on the New York Times story covering the event: "Obama Tells Fellow Blacks: 'No Excuses' for Failure."
Somehow the Times saw fit to dismiss Obama's meaningful acknowledgement of continued discrimination and, instead, portray his speech as a dose of "tough love" to black America.
The Times was not alone, though. The Huffington Post, a purportedly more liberal outlet, titled its article "Your destiny is in your hands … 'No excuses.'"
It is true that President Obama borrowed a page from the book of black leaders as diverse as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the Rev. Al Sharpton and Minister Louis Farrakhan in outlining the need for black self-empowerment. But it was a damaging oversight to ignore the president's recognition of systemic inequality and the policy solutions he laid out to reform these systems.
By addressing the living legacy of white supremacy, African-American socio-economic disenfranchisement, President Obama advanced the discussion of racial inequality.
The president pointed out that the African American community still suffers from discrimination and is disproportionately hurt by a recession and the boom/bust economy that has broadened economic inequality throughout the country. He included policy proposals ranging from changes to tax policy, health care, education and housing to improve the condition of African Americans.
One of the most repeated themes in Obama's address was that the nation's racial inequality is not an African-American problem, but rather a problem of our entire nation. Yet if you read the New York Times, you'd think the president was simply scolding African Americans for failing to live up to their potential.
I had hoped for more from the leading newspaper in the country. Not only should the Times have reported on what Obama actually said, but as is done concerning other important policy matters, it should have also examined whether Obama's prescriptions were adequate for the ongoing racial economic divide.
As someone who studies the racial economic divide, particularly between African-Americans and whites, my strongest criticism of the address is that Obama's policy solutions are not strong enough to overcome the structural inequality suffered by African Americans. African Americans have only 10 percent of the wealth of white Americans and they are segregated into the most disenfranchised communities. On top of that, their job loss rate has been far higher than the rest of American's during our current economic crisis.
When I first read President Obama's address to the NAACP, I had a mixed reaction. I was glad to have a president who saw government responsibility for the structural inequality developed through decades of discrimination. At the same time, I found myself disappointed that he did not advocate for stronger measures, like an equity assessment of all future federal spending to ensure that government funds do not solidify the racial economic divide.
Yet after reading news coverage of President Obama's address, I realized that his discussion of structural inequality is beyond what most Americans are prepared to deal with, or at least beyond what The New York Times sees as news that's fit to print.
Dedrick Muhammad is the senior organizer and research associate for the Inequality and Common Good Project of the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C. - www.ips-dc.org
thanks.
Appreciated. And impressed by the tech skills of those
who can move text.
Corruption in Africa
The worst kinds of corruption in Africa are those done at the behest of foreign powers and corporations. Obama as usual only puffed what his white masters liked to hear about blacks and Africa. This guy is worse than Bush! With Bush, there are no qualms about what we are getting.
Obama Lies To Who?
Hi at BAR; yes, I listened to Obama speech from Africa and heard some things that I did not agree with, but, who agrees with everything someone says. I have for years now wondered if the dictators of the many African Nations would be defaced by their thief of riches and sent to their offshore bank accounts in Switerland and elsewhere for that matter, to ever be deposed and replaced by honest African Leaders, who concerns are only for the People, and not their ego's! Yes, we all have seen these past 40 years - and I'm 53 and grew up during the movement of Black Power, when many in the NAACP wanted to be called 'colored' - to now see that that organization is still stuck in the past of 'we shall overcome'. No, Africa needs to cleans itself of the still corrupt leaders who only care about their legacies. It was with many of these so-called African leaders, who put the chains of the IMF upon the still bent backs of the masses. Seeing how the US is coercing many of these African leaders to sit down and do nothing until we come to the rescue....no; Khadafihi and others like him are trying to move that land of Health and Life into a new beganning of Power and indepenance. If we can remove the remaining 'Sucker' leaders from power, there just might be some chance of development on that Continent. With the right factors on the ground - as I have contacted the Partners Afro Farmers here to see about using their knowledge of farming and exporting it to Africa - the land is rich and ready to feel the World, and with the right African Leadership, who knows how far this will go. No longer should we streatch out the hand to the IMF - but should instill, reach out with both hands and go around their necks and bring about the largest lawsuit against these thiefs who stole riches from this land mass. Yes, a World wide law suit for 'Reprerations' should be filed in each EU country who did mass murder and oppression upon that People. No, let's use our wealth and so should the so-called 'Rich and Famous' amoung us take up this matter and get back what was stolen from Us!!!!
Waleed Naeem Yaser.........................
Corruption here; corruption everywhere!
There are corrupt leaders in Africa without a doubt. But what continent does not have corrupt leaders and/or corporate thieves? It is a fallacy to think that Africa's problems would disappear if only "those people could elect honest leaders". There is no shortage of stand-up and disciplined leaders who daily fight against imperialism and the exploitation of the continent's human and natural resources. Right now, Mugabe is being demonized and dehumanized for defending his country against exploitation and against the theft of its wealth for the benefit of the US, UK and EU. Comrade Bob is not perfect but he is a breath of fresh air in a continent led by corrupt dictators chosen by the imperialist countries to be the guardians of their interests at the expense of their citizens. If wishes were horses, the US, UK and EU would ride Tsvangirai into power to perpetuate the corruption Obama pretends to be so opposed to.
In fact, Africa has had quite a few patriots who could not be bought in order to serve foreign interests who view Africa as their playground and fatted calf. What happebed to Lumumba, Nkrumah, Obote in 1962, Sobukwe, Biko, Chitepo, Machel, Cabral and the many patriots murdered by the dictators put in power by the CIA, MI5, MI6, MOSSAD and other western spy agencies? Africans don't need Obama to tell them about corruption when his country is the beneficiary of such corruption. You can replace all the corrupt leaders in Africa, but her problems would not disappear for the simple reason that those problems have been hatched in western capitals. Africans are not inherently corrupt as Obama would have you believe. The emphasis placed on the issue of corruption is nothing but a distraction designed to draw attention away from the real causes of poverty which are the crimes of neo-colonialism and imperialism. Obama had the nerve to declare that Africa's colonial history and today's neo-colonialism have no bearing to what is happening today! What a fool, this Obama character is!
Africans do not control their economies! They don't set the prices for the goods they produce and sell in order to survive. The IMF and World Bank are nothing but instruments of oppression and exploitation whose sole purpose for existence is to solidify capitalism's grip on the economies of the developing nations, advance neo-liberal economic policies and render them (developing nations) forever indebted to these conveyors of evil and shameless parasites who steal from the mouths of African infants to quench their thirst for human blood and huge appetites for more of the same.
We have, as Africans and African-Americans, a responsibility and duty to root out the corruption meted out against the interests and well-being of our people. We also have a responsibilty to distinguish between genuine economic sluggishness that is a consequence of the failure of the capitalist system on one hand, and the man-made brutal conditions manufactured and hatched in western capitals to undermine our resolve to free ourseleves from the shackles of capitalism and western arrogance. Obama has no role to play in that process. He has made his bed; so should he lie on it!
Lessons from Afghanistan: "The Same Donkey with a new saddle"
The big lie of Afghanistan
My country hasn't been liberated: it's still under the warlords' control, and Nato occupation only reinforces their power."
by, Malalai Joya:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jul/25/afghanistan-occupati...
"For expressing my views I have been expelled from my seat in parliament, and I have survived numerous assassination attempts. The fact that I was kicked out of office while brutal warlords enjoyed immunity from prosecution for their crimes should tell you all you need to know about the "democracy" backed by Nato troops.
In the constitution it forbids those guilty of war crimes from running for high office. Yet Karzai has named two notorious warlords, Fahim and Khalili, as his running mates for the upcoming presidential election. Under the shadow of warlordism, corruption and occupation, this vote will have no legitimacy, and once again it seems the real choice will be made behind closed doors in the White House. As we say in Afghanistan, "the same donkey with a new saddle".
Asleep "at the wheel" of Air Force One
Maybe Obama (or O'toma as I perceive him) should have watched a dvd of "Blood Diamonds" on the way to Africa as he reclined in Air Force One.
I watched it again this weekend. A decent movie, I'd say, about the abject callousness, ruthlessness, greed, vanity and cynicism of Western interests in Sierra Leone and their role in "conflict diamonds." Perhaps on the return flight back home his flunkies should have stuck "Hotel Rwanda" in the dvd. Another movie that is revealing in the manner in which Western societies treat African lives as utterly meaningless, notwithstanding the vacuous, "nice lies" that formed Bill Clinton's "apology" for that atrocity. How quickly the MSM forgets Susan Rice's role, which should have earned her and Slick Willie a trip to the Hauge for complicity in genocide. (Still waiting to hear Dr. Susan Rice's "apology").
When (either directly or through proxies) whites control the wealth, venture capital, technology, infrastructure, banking system, major corporations, military institutions, political power, ect. how does one expect Africa to solve it's problems overnight anymore than one can expect Black, urban America to solve their's overnight? I won't even get into the fact of CIA, MOSSAD, and Western Elite cover operations subverting the will of the people through targeted assassinations, bribes, and fomenting terrorism and unrest. (Don't be surprised if Iraq erupts within year if not sooner, the last thing western interests want is a stable Iraq. A stable Iraq negates western military presence)
http://www.counterpunch.org/floyd1101.html
As an aside but very much related think about MSM, "progressive" bloggers and Obama Admin. propaganda regardng the "Iran issue" and how the debate is cast in terms of nuclear weapons to obscure the fact that it's as much if not more about Western society maintaining technological/military superiority. How do yall think "sanctions" work if white folks ain't pulling the strings??
Thank you!
Thanks for making this plain!
I Agree
I totally agree that Obama preys on the desperately hopeful, and takes advantage of them with his rhetoric. That's the only reason why he's president. People in America were desperate for change and he took advantage of that.
-Nikki-
Not our man !
Excellent !! Mr. Ford.
I have been asking myself for a week now; what could have been going through the minds of the NAACP top brass as they listened to their man polish them good. And I say their man because if they can sit there nodding their heads in approval and aplauding him as he pushes his pompous and cynical rhetorical finger in their chests with out the slightest glimmer of resistance, at least being taken aback; well then, he is certainly their man. Not ours; We the people, who won't stop requesting that the effervescence of those Constitutional proclamations finally be formed into what we the people can taste and feel, will be demanding much more from him the very near future. And so the process in the fight for Freedom and equality continues. It is an education.
video of Nellie Bailey and Carl Dix speaking at protest on WBAIX
Good video of Nellie Bailey and Carl Dix speaking at
the protest outside the NAACP Convention is on
www.wbaix.org WBAIX.org is WBAI-in-Exile.
Go the the ON-DEMAND section, below the video
screen to find the 2 videos. www.wbaix.org