The Black Misleadership Class

From: MLK and Obama: Two Diametrically Opposed Legacies

by Glen Ford

…[T]he decisive blow to the Black movement for self-determination and against U.S. imperialism was delivered by forces internal to the Black community. It came from a class that had not been concerned about justice in any civilizational sense, but only about getting rid of Jim Crow — American apartheid — so that they could also walk the halls of the empire and live the corporate life.

Their vehicle — the only one that was open to this Black aspiring class — was the Democratic Party, because the other party was busy transforming itself into the White Man’s Party.

With very few exceptions, this was a class for itself, consumed by a mission of “representationalism.” They wanted no part in social transformation; they wanted only to be represented in the upper echelons of corporate, governmental and symbolic media power.

Their agenda was solely concerned with their own upward mobility. They were not about justice or peace.

Here are two examples — founding members of this new, Black Misleadership Class:

Carl Stokes, the first Black big city mayor, elected in Cleveland, 1967. The first thing he did was to appoint a Black retired general as police chief, and the first thing the general did was to arm the cops with hollow point bullets.

Maynard Jackson, the first Black mayor of Atlanta, elected in 1973. Four years later, he fired 1,000 striking sanitation workers – the same folks that Dr. King had gone to Memphis to support nine years earlier — and died trying.

The rise of a selfish, servile, corporate ass-kissing Black class, combined with murderous application of state power, snuffed out the Black Liberation Movement, which was anti-imperialist at the core.

There was a brief resurgence of Black “movement” politics with the campaign against South African apartheid. But, only briefly.

For two generations, Black movement politics was smothered by the hegemonic power of the Democratic Party, whose tentacles strangled the militancy out of virtually every Black civic organization. The churches, the fraternities, the sororities — all behave like annexes of the Democratic Party.

They invoke Dr. King’s name, and use the word “justice” a lot — and the word “peace” every so often — but justice and peace cannot possibly find a home in one of the two parties of war.

So, the question becomes: Does two generations without a real peace and social justice movement in Black America mean that the Black Radical Tradition has been crushed? Have Black people, the historically most left-leaning constituency in the United States, shed their anti-imperialism and embraced war?

The most definitive answer that I have seen to that question came in a Zogby poll, conducted in late February, 2003. It was only a few weeks before George Bush crossed into Iraq — a war that everyone knew was coming. The Zogby poll asked a straightforward question. Here it is, verbatim:

“Would you support an invasion of Iraq if it resulted in the death of thousands of Iraqi civilians?”

A super-majority of white males said, “Hell yes, let’s get it on.” A bare majority of white females felt the same way. Sixteen percent of Hispanic Americans said they would invade, even if it meant killing thousands of civilians.

However, only 7 percent of Blacks agreed with that statement — meaning, only a marginal segment of Black America had any willingness to kill Iraqi men, women and children. This shows that the Black worldview is worlds apart from that of most white men and women. It’s also very strong evidence that Black people remain anti-imperialist, despite two generations without a movement that was loudly and proudly and defiantly anti-imperialist.

But, then came the First Black President: Barack Obama.

We at Black Agenda Report feared, correctly, that a pro-war, Black Democratic president would have a profound effect on Black political behavior. We were very anxious about the rise of this guy who we knew would be a war president. We worried about the effect that his presence in the Oval Office would have on the Black worldview. We expected, and got, the worst.

We feared that Black people, for the first time in history, might begin to identify with U.S. national power if one of their number was the personification of that power. That is a very, very heady brew for a people who had been rendered invisible for most of their sojourn in North America.

There was never any question of how the Black Misleadership Class would react to having a Black Democrat in the White House. Their agenda is to stick as close to Power as possible, and to celebrate Blacks being represented in the halls of power, even if that person is engaged in crimes against humanity and crimes against peace. And so, the Black Misleadership Class did not surprise us in terms of their behavior under President Obama.

Back in 2002, when President George Bush was asking for War Powers permission to attack Iraq, only four members of the Congressional Black Caucus went along with him. But by June of 2011, when the United States and NATO were doing their regime change mission in Libya, more than half of the Congressional Black Caucus — 24 members — gave their full permission and assent to Obama’s continued bombing of Libya. And 31 of the 40 or so voting members of the Caucus opted to continue spending money on the Libyan operation. That number includes John Lewis, who tries to cloak himself in all the vestments of Dr. Martin Luther King. He also voted to continue funding for that war, AFRICOM’s first war on Africa.

Keith Ellison called that war “a blow for freedom and self-determination.”

But, what about the masses of Black people? There was some disturbing evidence of the effect that Barack Obama’s presence in the White House was having on Black people’s historical, bedrock anti-imperialism. Back in late August of 2013, Obama threatened to launch airstrikes against Syria. Polls showed that 40 percent of Black Americans would have supported such an airstrike, compared to only 38 percent of whites and a smaller percentage of Hispanic Americans.

It is true that only minorities of any American ethnicity supported Obama’s threatened strike, but this was the first poll in the history of polling in which more Black people were for a warlike action than white people. Compare that to the only 7 percent of Blacks that supported an invasion of Iraq, a decade earlier. Obama has had his effect.


With the current hysteria about Russia, we see the entirety of the Congressional Black Caucus and the Black Misleadership Class badmouthing the Kremlin with the same intensity and insanity as their white counterparts. What really disturbed me, however, was a conversation I had with a brother who styles himself as a revolutionary. He’s head of the Revolutionary Black Panther Party. I was interviewing him after the police “vamped” on some of their members in Milwaukee. All of a sudden, out of the blue, he starts talking about those damn Russians! And he’s supposed to be a revolutionary Black Panther!

Dr. Gerald Horne speaks of the “Putin Derangement Syndrome” that afflicts the ruling circles in the United States, who fear the U.S. is losing its dominant position in the world. But, somehow, this insanity has filtered down, even to folks that call themselves Black revolutionaries.

The First Black President has left us with a deep and lingering problem. Even out of office, he packs a weaponized legacy.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: