Analysis Of Randall Kennedy's Analysis Of Toure's Post-Blackness Theory: Progressive-Fundamentalism Posing As Black Thought

The Root.com: Randall Kennedy - The Fallacy of Touré's Post-Blackness Theory

The Black Commentator On Randall Kennedy

In an attempt to unravel social commentator Toure's latest progressive treatises on how Black people should strategically move beyond the classical racial confinements that we are ensconced in within the American "racist" society Harvard professor Randall Kennedy posits a literary work that is untrue to his own nature.

My analysis of present-day Black political discourse is that it is not, in fact, "Black" but instead "Progressivism that is customized to appeal to the tastes of Black people".  If Prof Kennedy had written his rebuttal to Toure's piece - he would have produced a better article, one that more accurately modeled the real world conditions in Black America that Toure' was attempting to make a way forward in.

Below is a list of key abstractions from Randall Kennedy's article.  I will place it in table form so that these points are not lost in a blizzard of words.

From the Root.com article:

Randall Kennedy's Commentary	Constructive Feedback
African Americans fight a multifront struggle in pursuing their ambitions. Along with the difficulties that others face -- bad luck, personal deficiencies, talented competitors -- blacks face additional obstacles. On one front they encounter prejudiced Caucasians. On another they encounter Negroes who, attached to stunted conceptions of racial solidarity, habitually castigate as disloyal blacks perceived as "acting white," being "oreos," "selling out." Blacks characteristically confront white racism with uninhibited fury. With black critics, however, they often display ambivalence. Even when chafing miserably from constraints imposed by racial solidarity, many blacks nonetheless bite their tongues. They refrain from speaking openly and frankly because the rhetoric and performance of racial solidarity occupies an honored position in black American circles. It has claims on blacks' psyches even as they wrestle with the restraints that solidarity entails.	Note that while Prof Kennedy notes the suppressive effects of White racists and Black Attack Sheep Dogs who enforce racial loyalties - the primary flaw in Kennedy's analysis is that he never mentions that there has been an affirmative investment by Black people in the promises of "Black Community Development" IF we follow along with these forces who are erecting the political machines that dominates our community today. Kennedy never inspects the lack of "return on investment" received by the Black community. While indeed we might be still among "The Vulnerable Masses" - just as we started out - our pockets are lighter because of the invested "Equal Black Ballots" and the fused Black Community Uplift Consciousness". Kennedy never inspects if this enforcement is part of a grand manipulation scheme which has nullifying effects upon  our people. What is the index between the continued suppression by "racist Whites" versus the failed thrust from the engines that are controlled by Black Progressives and "non-Racist" White progressives who are together in a joint venture?
Touré claims that he wants African Americans to have the freedom to be black in whatever ways they choose and that he aspires "to banish from the collective mind the bankrupt, fraudulent concept of 'authentic' Blackness."	While this passage is taken from Toure', with Kennedy providing it to his readers before disassembling the claim - the ironic point of the undertone is that at a time when traditional bindings on religious tolerance and sexual orientation  - Kennedy appears to argue the impracticality of allowing people to follow their whims with respect to racio-social norms.   In this one instance been "conservative" in defense of the traditional operating lines proves profitable for Kennedy.  The spoils of which are the entact Black "congregation", ready for use political battle in the cover of racial uplift.  "Freedom" from the prevailing Black (Progressive) social and cultural dogma means that the feared dilution of Black consciousness that presently follows the noted hierarchy via the leadership and organizations will be destroyed.  At this point we typically hear "That racist White police man who beats you upside your head is not going to see through your 'post-racial' mental self-identification"
Touré, a 40-year-old author of three previous books, a contributing editor to Rolling Stone and a correspondent for MSNBC, is a keen student and practitioner of publicity who rounds up a posse of artists, scholars and journalists to assist with the promotion of his brand of "post-Blackness." Despite his avant-garde pretensions, Touré is at bottom rather conventional: a politically liberal black guy who wants to make it in the white-dominated world of print journalism and television broadcasting without catching flak from "brothas" and "sistahs" because of the way he talks (preppy), because of his significant other (a woman who is not African American) and because of his attachment to ideas that he knows some blacks will disdain.	Kennedy fails to note that with Toure' hanging out at "Rolling Stone" and "MSNBC" he is among a sea of White Progressives and thus "friends to Black people".  All of Kennedy's examples of "bad White people" are White Conservatives or Blacks (like Clarence Thomas) who Kennedy believes operates in the spirit of a White Conservative enemy of Black people. Why didn't Kennedy affirm the new consciousness that the company of White Progressives have enlightened Toure' to? When MSNBC and Rolling Stone Magazine affirm Obama - "The First Black President" are they affirming Black people or merely using Obama as a "Progressive Vessel"?
To what, however, does he refeir to when he says "our"? For "our" to have meaning, it must have some boundary that separates "us" from "them." If post-black opens the door to everything, does that mean thatanyone can rightly be deemed "Black"? Just suppose that Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly, as a joke, declared themselves to be black.	Expanding upon the previous row - While Kennedy understood the effect that listing "Glenn Beck" and "Bill O'Reilly" would have on Black Progressive readers of his article he understood that listing "Tim Wise" or "Ed Schultz" as "Self-Affirming Blacks" would not render the same effect. Once again - Kennedy never has to come out and proclaim the virtual interchange between "Black" and "Progressive".   These facts come out in the arguments of his article. Why is it that MSNBC is worthy of hosting "The Black Agenda Show - with Ed Schultz" but not make honorable mention in Kennedy's article? With Tim Wise operating as the "ears of Black people in all White gatherings" - telling Black people what White folks say about us when we are not around.  Why didn't Kennedy use Wise instead of O'Reilly?  Isn't Tim Wise more of an "Honorary Black Man" in Black Progressive circles?
What Touré and his allies seek to escape are fundamental aspects of any community: boundaries and discipline. Every community -- be it a family, firm or nation-state -- necessarily has boundaries that distinguish members from nonmembers. That boundary is a constituent element of the community's existence.	BOUNDARIES & DISCIPLINE!!! This passage motivated me to write this post. As I consider the "boundaries and discipline" imposed by the prevailing Black Establishment - I see more "Progressive" discipline enforcement than I do "Black".   In addition to my standard list of "Black Permanent Interests" it is also true that "The Black Agenda" should define when to PULL THE PLUG on that which is failing.   The turth is, however, that the "discipline and boundaries" that Kennedy is speaking of in relation to the Black community are not BLACK - they are PROGRESSIVE. About this time one week ago I listened attentively to Dr Ron Daniels.  He made the case that Black people are not in a struggle for political parties.  We are in a battle between "conservatism" and "progressivism".   Why should anyone accept the framing of Kennedy while putting aside the far more active framework that Daniels voices?
No restriction? But what about an African American who expresses racial hatred for blacks? Or what about an African American who joins a legitimate black-uplift organization for the purpose of crippling it? Blacks (or anyone else) who do or say such things ought to be shunned as forcefully as possible in order to punish them, render them ineffective and dissuade others from following a similar course.	This passage captures my central frustration with Black Progressive-Fundamentalism. They can articulate the tale of the "Black self-hater who seeks to wreck 'Black Uplift Organizations".     The PUBLIC SCHOOL and the education that it distributes has been sold as the #1 "Black Uplift Organization" for the ages.   They can't bring themselves to speak of the "Dark-Matter" that accompanies this claim.   Earlier this week I reported on the saga of the Memphis Public School System.   After several decades of struggle - a favorable establishment power took over control of the schools.  Despite their BEST INTENTIONS to provide quality education to Black students - they failed. Kennedy can't seem to fathom the notion that INTENTIONS have nothing to do with EFFECTIVENESS.  There is a large storehouse of "Squandered Black Dreams" that have been piled up - based on the notions of what Black progressives with "good intentions" might be able to bring forth for our community.   Sadly - avoiding "mean spirited" choices with regard to fiscal solvency are less compelling than "Sub-prime Public Policy" that have a balloon payment that "our ass
Boycotting Clarence Thomas	If Kennedy has not reserved a special paragraph for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as the poster child of "Vacated Blackness" and worthy of "Progressive bigoted scorn" I would have though ill of him. With this selection Kennedy chooses to promote the popular target for Black Progressive-fundamentalists while eschewing all commentary about proportionality. A Black person being locked up in: Atlanta Philadelphia Detroit Chicago is likely to be: Arrested Jailed Prosecuted Judged and Incarcerated by an authority figure that received "50% +1" from the Black voter. In fact with some of these authority figures being "the first Black {fill in the blank}" the Black community's pride can be heard. To Kennedy and other progressives - the tale of Clarence Thomas being a sellout is far more important than the observation that the "Neo-Jim Crow Movement" is discredited in the "Mission Accomplished City" list above. IF a racist conspiracy to destroy Black people is the cause of the high incarceration rates - Michelle Alexander's theories fail to explain why the Dekalb County Georgia jail is full of Black inmates and Black sheriff deputies watching over them.  The answer to the question is that Neither Michelle Alexander, Van Jones, NAACP or Randall Kennedy are really interested in investigating and correcting "Why Black males disproportionately end up in jail".  They are merely interested in appeasing their progressive proclivities which make the case that someone else is responsible for the present fate.
Religions impose excommunication. Nations revoke citizenship. Parents disown children. Children disown parents. Why, as a matter of principle, should blacks be disallowed from casting from their community those adjudged to be enemies of it?	Randall Kennedy just doesn't get it!!! The tale of the prevailing progressive Black consciousness IS NOT the legacy of "Who it FAILS to excommunicate". Instead the key issue is the bigoted unwillingness to proclaim that the intramural "Civil Rights Violations" are in fact "Civil Rights Violations". Thus I say that a Black Progressives credibility is determined to a greater extent by the offensive against Black people that they are SILENT about than we should ponder that which provokes them into a protest.

HTML Tables