Crisis among our Black boys demands a radical approach

Here’s a radical but not so revolutionary educational idea.

How about the creation of an all-Black, all-male school?

Better yet, how about an all-Black, all male K through 12 grade quasi military academy, one that would turn our young boys into men with high morals, discipline, high self-esteem.

At risk boys who would be taught by culturally conscious and dedicated Black males (and perhaps a few conscious Black females) and be able to perform on the same level academically as students attending the best suburban schools?

Such an academy would help address the community’s concerns about the crisis our Black boys face today.

The school we’re imagining would be a true "community school" because the community and surrounding neighborhood would actually have oversight, as would the parents of the students and the school’s administrators and teachers, all key components working together to guarantee the success of our future leaders.

Gone would be the distraction of girls, the culture of the streets, and the cynicism of an education system that has already written-off our sons as damaged goods heading for destruction.

It’s not as farfetched an idea as you might think. As a matter of fact a group of Black activists, educators and Africentrists are seriously contemplating such an academy, which would also house the young men in dorm-like facilities (in a chaperoned environment) away from the lure of the streets, requiring them to wear uniforms and allow them to go home to visit their families every other weekend.

Given the endangered status of Black boys and men, such an idea--as extreme as it may be to some in our community--might be the only avenue left at our disposal to save our boys and adolescent males.

The federal government is granting waivers that would allow dollars to be used for the creation of single-sex schools. Here in Milwaukee, those dollars could go to revising an africentric academic model that was used in a central city public school (for boys and girls) several years ago with some success.

For more than a decade, a Black male study envisioned just such a format for Malcolm X. Because of politics, internal bickering and negative engineering, the concept died on the vine.

Now, Malcolm X is in transit and may be transferred to North Division. Under its current format, we feel the "new Malcolm X" is doomed to failure. So why not try something new, innovative and encompassing?

Unfortunately, before the school and the program could truly bear positive fruit, it was discontinued amidst criticism by some educators and public education supporters, one of whom compared the curriculum to "voodoo."

It is incumbent upon the community--and in particular strong, conscious and dedicated Black males to forge ahead and make a "what if" a reality. Time is of the essence for time is running out for our young men...and our community.

Letter to the Editor

Former Mayor Pratt responds to columnist

Editor’s Note: Below is a letter former Milwaukee Mayor Marvin Pratt wrote to a columnist with the city’s daily newspaper. Pratt is responding to a paragraph the columnist wrote in which he attributed an alledged quote to the former mayor.

To: Mike Nichols

"Milwaukee Journal Sentinel"

Dear Mike Nichols:
It was brought to my attention that in your November 19 column, in an attempt to be clever you deliberately misquoted my mayoral concession speech.

While I did keep it real and not sugar coat the obvious, I never used the statement, "You know, they hung me."

The fact that you would attribute this statement to me only suggests continuation of the "Milwaukee Journal’s" mission to only spotlight what they would perceive to be negative in the African American community.

I would have never used the statement "you know they hung me." Who are "they?" I would not have used such a vague term as "they." I never made a secret as to how I perceived both the "Milwaukee Journal’s" coverage of the mayoral election and the actions of (former Milwaukee County District Attorney E. Michael) McCann’s office.

While I have moved on, I still view your recent column as a continuation of this slanted coverage. This type of journalism might help to temporarily boost the "Milwaukee Journal’s" waning circulation, but the price has been the newspaper’s journalistic integrity.

In your column, you quickly jumped to the conclusion and also made a judgement that there was an element of wrong doing on my part regarding the American Family settlement.

You also implied this settlement would some how heal my bitterness. What bitterness? I am a positive person. I have been blessed, my life has been good and continues to be so. I have accomplished things in my life that most people only dream of.

The U.S. Attorney’s office is currently investigating the American Family issue and if they rule that the money was paid by mistake, then I, like the other Class Committee members will return it.

Since you have never run for political office, it is easy for you to sit on the sidelines and "Monday morning quarterback" an election and try to dictate how a candidate should feel and act.

There is no way you can understand what it takes to run. Under the best circumstances winning or losing a political office is a difficult experience.

I am a husband, a father, a grandfather, a educated African American, a direct commissioned retired military officer and a 30-plus year employee of city government in four different city departments with a significant number of firsts in many areas.

Contrary to what you and the "Milwaukee Journal" would like to imply, I am a success story. I remember the past and I know it, but don’t live in it!

Mike, I would say to you be positive after all, it is the Thanksgiving season. But on the other hand, if you were positive, you probably wouldn’t have your current job.

Sincerely,
Marvin Pratt, Former Mayor

Is China helping or exploiting Africa?

by Judge Greg Mathis
Leaders from China and 48 African countries recently announced a trade agreement worth $1.9 billion. The pact includes investment deals, low-cost loans and aid, all to help boost development in Africa. Let’s hope Africa does benefit from this partnership.

China is sure to profit--the country’s power players are known for making and benefiting from deals that other nations thought impossible. But what about Africa? Will this new deal pull Africa’s nations from the depths of poverty or exploit the country’s people and resources, as so many other relationships--reciprocal or forced--have done in the past?

China’s affiliation with Africa is nothing new: the country has already spent billions securing its right to drill for oil in African nations like Nigeria and Angola; deals to begin drilling in Kenya and Ethiopia are in the works.

The Chinese have also invested in the copper industry in Zambia and Congo and have bought large shares of lumber from Cameroon, Liberia and other nations. In the last year, China’s trade with Africa increased by nearly $30 billion and continues to grow. Africa’s economy has nearly doubled in that same period; experts say that one of the major reasons behind this growth in the increased trade with China.

Though Africa’s economy has improved, almost half of Africa’s people still live on less than one dollar a day; most of the world’s poorest countries are in Africa.

Many blame Africa’s poverty on corrupt governments and economies and famine and, to some extent, these things play a role. But Africa’s poverty is a direct result of the slave trade and colonialism. Historically, wealthier nations--among them are Britain and France--raped the continent, depleting it of its wealth of resources--human and natural--and leaving its residents to wallow in unimaginable poverty.

China has been heavily criticized for making business deals without any regards to the political and social climates of the region they are in. The country’s policy of staying out of other nation’s affairs see it doing business in areas where human rights violations are rampant, government corruption is the norm and democracy is a far away dream. In the past, Chinese companies were criticized for funneling cash to an African president charged with war crimes and for funding civil war in another one of the continent’s nations.

For Africa to return to her former glory, foreign investment is key. Last year, Africa received less than 2 percent of all foreign direct investment. This lack of investment means less money to create jobs to alleviate poverty. But foreign investment must come with some measure of social responsibility. If China continues to ignore the wide-spread violations that trouble the African nations it works in, Africa will not truly prosper. African leaders will become more powerful, the rich will become wealthy. But most of Africa will not reap the benefits of this billion dollar agreement.

Too many countries have taken from Africa, leaving nothing but despair behind. Let’s hope China’s involvement with Africa won’t be reminiscent of the past. Time will only tell if China is committed to spurring development in Africa.

Judge Greg Mathis is national vice president of Rainbow PUSH and a national board member of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

Jack Palance was a fine actor and a wonderful movie villain

by Richard G. Carter
"Hear me, Cooney, loud and clear. If I ever lose another man on account of you, I’ll come back and get you. I’ll shove this grenade down your throat and pull the pin!"--Jack Palance, "Attack" (1956)

During a pivotal moment in 1953’s "Shane"-- which many experts feel is the best Western movie of all time--renowned character actor Elisha Cook, Jr. offered a succinct description of the menacing newcomer he had just encountered:

"Stranger decked-out like a gunfighter. You know him when you see him. Packs two guns. Kinda lean. Wears a black hat."

The man to which he referred was Jack Wilson, chillingly portrayed by the late Jack Palance. His work in the film was so superb that he was nominated for an Oscar as Best Supporting Actor for a scant eight minutes on screen.

Following a dramatic, fast-draw shootout in the penultimate scene of this classic, multi-Academy Award winning flick, a telling exchange occurred between wide-eyed, 11-year-old Brandon de Wilde, and a wounded Alan Ladd:

De Wilde: "Was that him, Shane? Was that Wilson?"

Ladd: "That was him. That was Wilson, alright. He was fast. Fast on the draw!"

And that was Jack Palance, initially billed as Walter Jack Palance. On screen, he was fast on the draw in more ways than one, owing to a smoldering intensity and striking physical features.

The authoritative Filmgoers Companion accurately notes: "His face, a triumph of plastic surgery after war action, made him a natural for villainous roles."

Indeed, the camera loved Palance. This truly fine actor and great movie villain, passed away on November 10, at age 87. As was the case with the 1980 death of the nonpareil Steve McQueen, American cinema will never be the same without him. For more than five decades, Palance’s work was the stuff dreams are made of.

Prior to "Shane," he was nominated for a supporting actor Oscar for "Sudden Fear" (1952)--as the jilted husband-turned stalker of Joan Crawford. Nearly 40 years later, at 73, he was voted Best Supporting Actor for "City Slickers" (1991) and delighted a national television audience by doing one-armed pushups after accepting his award.

In his youth, the rough-and-tumble Palance used his muscularly angular, 6-4 physique to advantage as a professional heavyweight boxer under the name Jack Brazo. During World War II, he served as a B-24 bomber pilot and suffered facial injuries when his plane crashed.

Ironically, reconstructive surgery provided the distinctive features that helped define his menacing roles as the ultimate screen heavy.

On the heels of a brief career on the Broadway stage--he understudied Marlon Brando in "A Streetcar Named Desire"--Palance broke into movies in 1950 as a New Orleans gangster-victim of bubonic plague in "Panic in the Streets." This was followed by four decades of showy, often memorable roles in a host of other films. Included were: "Halls of Montezuma," (1951); "Second Chance" (1953); "Sign of the Pagan" as Attila the Hun and "Man in the Attic" as Jack the Ripper (1954); "The Big Knife" (1955); "The Man Inside" (1957); "Ten Seconds to Hell" (1958); "Barabbas" (1962); "Once a Thief" (1965); "The Professionals" (1966); "Che!" as Fidel Castro (1969); "Monte Walsh" (1970); "Oklahoma Crude" (1973), and in the title role on TV in 1968’s "The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" and dazzling work as Count Dracula in a 1973 television movie of the same name.

In 1956, on live TV, Palance gave a bravura, Emmy-winning performance in the Playhouse 90 production of Rod Serling’s poignant "Requiem for a Heavyweight."

Creating the character of Mountain McClintock (lovingly reprised as Mountain Rivera by Anthony Quinn on the big screen in 1962), Palance was simply stunning.

But as a lifelong film aficionado awed by Palance from the beginning, I feel this great actor’s finest role was as an embittered army lieutenant in "Attack" (1956). Directed by Robert Aldrich and co-starring Lee Marvin, Eddie Albert, Buddy Ebsen and William Smithers, this scalding, controversial movie depicted cowardice by a frontline officer (Albert). As a result, the Department of Defense did not cooperate in its production.

In a gritty, black-and-white vehicle replete with honesty due to his eye-popping work, Palance’s death scene approaches Shakespearean tragedy.

Indeed, the scene has been compared to Humphrey Bogart tumbling to his death in 1941’s "High Sierra"--a role Palance successfully reprised in "I Died a Thousand Times" (1955).

After his arm was crushed by a huge German tank, a blood-soaked Palance staggers into a cellar in which his men and Albert--as the cowardly Captain Cooney--are holed up.

The sight of the craggy-faced Palance crawling on the floor taunted by Albert is one for the books. It must be seen to be believed and appreciated.

For those who appreciate honest realism in their film fare, I suggest you check-out "Attack" the next time it is presented uncut and commercial-free on Turner Classic Movies.

In the vintage Jack Palance, you will see an actor who embodied what Hollywood was all about in the 1950s when its slogan was "Movies are Better than Ever."

So bye, bye big fella. You were one of the great ones. Your matchless, sterling work provided me, and my generation, with countless great cinema moments.

Indeed, the name Jack Palance will live forever in the annals of Hollywood.

Richard G. Carter, a freelance writer, is a former columnist with "The Milwaukee Journal" and the "New York Daily News."

Is affirmative action dead?

by George E. Curry, NNPA Columnist
The disappointing passage of Proposal 2 in Michigan, after similar Right-wing successes with Prop 209 in California and Initiative 200 in Washington state, coupled with other attacks, means that pro-affirmative action forces need to become more aggressive in defending and explaining affirmative action. A failure to do either will spell the end of affirmative action as we know it.

The irony of the misnamed Michigan Civil Rights Initiative passing in Michigan is that it was the suit against the University of Michigan Law School that paved the way for the United States Supreme Court upholding the concept of affirmative action.

The court, rejecting a more numbers-oriented affirmative action program that the University of Michigan used at the undergraduate level, approved the more holistic approach used by the law school.

Writing for the 5-4 majority, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor stated, "The Law School’s narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body is not prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause."

What the law likes to refer to as a "reasonable person" would have concluded that the issue was clearly settled. Far from it.

Instead, Ward Connerly, the conservative Black California businessman who once benefited from a state set-aside program, decided to take his anti-affirmative action crusade on the road.

After winning in Michigan, he may be heading to your state. Connerly is part of a well-funded national campaign to win with confusing ballot initiatives what conservatives clearly lost in pleadings before a Supreme Court dominated by conservatives.

While Connerly leads the attack on one flank, an even more successful assault is being carried out by the Center for Individual Rights, a conservative think tank opposed to affirmative action. By simply threatening to file suit against universities, the institutions usually buckle rather than litigate.

Dozens of universities have scrapped race- or gender-sensitive programs rather than fight back.

Sadly, even the Justice Department came down on the side of CIR and pressured Southern Illinois University to terminate three fellowship programs whose recipients were mainly underrepresented women or people of color. But the Center for Individual Rights didn’t stop there.

It is now suing the Virginia Commonwealth University and the Dow Jones Newspaper Fund for operating a two-week high school journalism program designed to encourage African Americans to go into journalism, a field in which they are underrepresented.

CIR and other conservative groups are basically using the "equal protection clause" of the 14th Amendment, which was passed to end discrimination against African Americans, to attack programs aimed at helping Black Americans.

It has shamelessly turned the 14th Amendment on its head. And, as I’ve said countless times, there is no infrastructure on the Left to counter the energy and mischief of the Far Right.

They’ve been so successful that the news media has adopted the language of the Far Right.

Conservatives have been successful in getting not only the news media to adopt their misleading language, but even our own leaders have fallen into that trap.

"I saw a syndicated column this week by a national civil rights leader that asserted that Michigan’s Proposal 2 "bars use of preferences by state colleges and universities as well as government agencies."

How can we get news outlets to stop equating to race- and gender-sensitive actions with "preferences," if we’re using the loaded language ourselves?

As a 1995 report by the National Association of Black Journalists pointed out, "Since polls have shown that the public supports affirmative action, but opposes ‘preferential treatment,’ using the terms interchangeably, under the guise of objective reporting, unfairly characterizes affirmative action."

It further explained, "Using the term ‘preferences’ in this context betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the reason behind affirmative action: that it is intended to counter the built-in, systematic ‘preferences’ for White males that still exist."

In addition to losing the language war, we are not effectively arguing our case.

Admission to college has never been based strictly on test scores and grade point averages, yet the public is made to feel guilty because Jennifer Gratz, a White applicant, was not immediately accepted into the University of Michigan undergraduate school while supposedly "less qualified" African Americans were.

In one of its briefs, the University of Michigan noted, "In 1995, when petitioner Gratz applied...more than 1,400 White and Asian American students with lower adjusted high school GPS or test scores than hers were admitted, while more than 2,000 White and Asian American students with higher adjusted GPAs and test scores were rejected [Brief for Respondents, No. 02-516, Gratz v. Bollinger].

So much for Jennifer Gratz being discriminated against because she’s White.

This war on affirmative action is not over. But we shouldn’t continue to show up for the battle unarmed.

George E. Curry is editor-in-chief of the NNPA News Service and BlackPressUSA.com. To contact Curry or to book him for a speaking engagement, go to his Web site, www.georgecurry.com.