Jefferies Puts Down An Uprising From The Left

Are Black Politicians Used by Both Parties to Repress Dissent?

The Civil Rights Congress’ We Charge Genocides Petition to UN {photo by author of book}

I. Send in the Socialist Thought Police

“Representative Hakeem Jeffries, the House Democratic minority leader, made a late-stage campaign appearance in Manhattan to try to fend off an uprising from the left.”

Was Hakeem Jeffries just sent in to repress minorities? These “socialist Democrats” are treated as an existential threat to “democracy.” Instead, they are really just (excuse me for using this terrible term) People of Color seeking social justice through political representation. If you just landed in America, you wouldn’t know that Mr. Jeffries is black and a minority. You would think he is a white supremacist, judging from his instinct to repress a surging minority that wants fair opportunities instead of endless subjection. So how did he–and “we”–get to this point?

We have the House speaker repressing the voices of minorities in New York City (and their white allies, called pro-democracy advocates) to stop a grassroots surge in popularity. It should be obvious what is going on, given that the Democratic Party is a black man trying to repress black men and their ally. While “we” progressives (I’ll just use that, as I consider liberal a good but centrist white word that reminds me of Hillary Clinton — yuck) are pro-diversity and inclusion, pro-fairness and affirmative action, pro-limited abortion rights for women, and pro-ending forced marriage for children in America, the Democratic Party is increasingly like the modern Republican Party: pro-minority and pro-women repression.

I personally feel, in my opinion (such redundancy on purpose — put a pin in that), the Democratic Party uses women like Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren, and Blacks like Barack Obama, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Hakeem Jeffries, and others to posture on Civil Rights and appear they are supporting it, when the opposite has become more and more true. I have no regrets voting for Obama, as the first Black President came with endless death threats merely for being competent. I watched him release such stress with a tear when I watched Michelle Obama speak of his steady hand as president at the opening of the Obama Center. A tear — he finally had let go.

II. Who changed Equality into nasty communist Socialism?

Really, I must confess a small personal gripe: I came to hate the words “socialist” and “socialism.” The right has weaponized the term in American history to mean “minorities.” Right-wing mouthpieces on Fox News and similar outlets talk about “radicals” out to destroy America. It was treated as akin to Communism, and the white right appropriated the term in the early 1900s, bending it to emotionally pack it with fear, meaning [white] “traitor,” “American Jewish radical” (yes, it was antisemitic, but only back then), and “black activist,” all in one word.

Given the flexibility of fear, the right wing, united by white supremacist maleness, has adjusted the term over time. Right now, they are removing the “jew-ness” and whiteness while keeping the blackness and Latino and Muslim-ness (a new but obvious candidate). Right-wing flexibility is not based on reason but on the current need to repress non-white maleness.

Really, what this “socialist” wing is about, as shown in the picture from the NYTimes article, is minorities. A whole Rainbow Coalition has come together under this umbrella. I should probably include some white LGBTQ people as “those people” share something in common: repression. What “these people” want is their fair share of collective government resources. It’s just basic fairness to the country they contribute to and live in.

Instead, whether it is painfully obvious to them or not (though it is to me), what they get is deprivation. The state and federal governments collect taxes and excess revenue from corporations, which are derived from repressed wages. These resources are then directed to the rich at the expense of the poor, whom these groups represent. I have to exclude poor, lower- and middle-class whites, particularly because they are split off from the “coloreds” or POCs (again, apologies) and adhere to the white right half of political America.

The two parties have fused together. The last four presidents did not raise the minimum wage, engaged in expensive wars, expanded detention centers and prisons, weakened learning and schools, and let affirmative action and abortion be destroyed.

All of these issues affect non-whites the most, and women non-whites most of all.

The Democratic Party has not made any major corrections and is complicit through silence and inaction. School funding is not “socialized” and is getting worse. We are among the few countries that treat taxpayer money as hierarchical rather than collective. The greater good belongs to those who “earn” it, to those at the top, and cascades downward. That’s not new but deeply structural.

In practical terms, the system is characterized not by taxes collected nationally and distributed fairly on a per-student basis, as in other countries, but by states, which use property taxes on housing to distribute funds to schools largely based on home value rather than on students. There are many state-specific adjustments that unnecessarily complicate this system, and it takes several PhDs to explain and justify the differences. Those extremist complications that have evolved only enhance repression, not eliminate it. The core of the problem is crystal clear: every American child gets the same resources.

Is that fair? Yes, because you can’t punish a child for not being successful when they haven’t been given an equal opportunity to prove themselves as adults. Instead, we tie their success to their parents’ economic success, which is unfair. We underfund poor children in schools because their parents were underfunded and couldn’t access success because their schools were underfunded, and their grandparents. It’s not a “vicious cycle,” and time doesn’t move in a circular fashion. Instead, it’s a linear degradation: The longer this structure lasts, the greater the separation between classes becomes, including most minorities in America.

The Democrats have taken the Civil Rights narrative to gut its overall meaning and to celebrate individual minorities, like Martin Luther King Jr., the ones who have proven “harmless” and cooperative, stripping away all the unpleasantries from their individual narratives. But there are always minorities who rise up. That is the exception. The norm is repression, and that has continued systemically, especially in schooling. Democrats and Republicans have done nothing to fix this national “disgrace,” to borrow a Trump term.

He uses it the opposite of me, hierarchically, to destroy the Department of Education and to move “trouble youth” learning and “special education” to the back burner, to background them, a form of repressing their human equality. “Those people” with “restrained” mental capabilities, like those with Down Syndrome, cannot be as financially successful by using their science and business education potential to become a CEO of a tech company. And that’s OK. Their success in life lies in their integration, acceptance, and fairness as they move through society, not in intellectual achievement that then translates into financial success. Trump only likes financial success.

There are more issues, and I covered how Biden killed “social programs” back in 2022 and has never stopped. He distributed tax money to major microchip companies through government grants–$40 billion in grants–in the CHIP Act, which President Trump’s administration is not continuing or expanding. These are grants to major corporations, not loans. Loans would be bad enough — perhaps. But grants? While there is a rational justification for this move, there is no moral justification for redistributing collective taxpayer resources to the top in a “giveaway,” at the expense of “social programs.”

Biden, with the help of Democrats, killed these programs for the poor, the lower middle class, and the working class. He distributed their money upwards. The massive infrastructure bill was another defeat, handing billions in tax breaks to oil companies to build asphalt production, plastic plants, carbon capture technology, and other measures. I found five ways, when reading the details, that benefited oil companies through tax subsidies, which means redistribution of wealth upwards.

Like Republicans, he did nothing for Pre-K, let school vouchers continue in states, draining money from the poor and putting them in corporate schools, did NOT raise or double the minimum wage as promised, did NOT make community college free, did NOT bring down the cost of college and universities, did NOT attempt to pass a fair treatment abortion bill for women and sexually assaulted and impregnated children, did NOT end the forced marriage of children, did NOT close global military bases and bring down defense spending to allocate money and resources fairly to those “social programs.”

They are not “social programs” but human programs, and not even that, but fairness programs that are seen in “liberty and justice for all”. The country started on the right ideals, but conservative whites killed it over time by refusing to compromise to install democracy, perpetuating slavery and denying voting rights from Day One to 1865. After the Civil War, they found clever ways to continue those two fundamental deprivations. They’ve never stopped, only mentally disappeared by being subsumed into the whole. They are half the country — politically, not in numbers. 35% of eligible voters voted for Trump, which is even less of the overall population when you include children.

III. A Time to Kill Social Issues with Bombs

The worst is that the ethnic cleansing by Israel in Gaza was funded by Biden and Trump. Almost all of the destruction you see in the rubble shots of Gaza is paid for by American taxpayers. Without American taxpayers, Gaza would not have been destroyed. That is our collective money, which should go to schools, pre-K, humane approaches to homelessness, and many other “small” programs with big impacts, instead of funding bombs whose only impact is to destroy cities, the water and electricity infrastructure, and all jobs and shelter, leaving the entire population in a perpetual traumatized state of ethnic cleansing.

[The UN sets five parameters for genocide, and only three need to be met. Killing the ethnic underclass is only the 5th. So technically, 4 non-killing parameters can be met to ethnic cleanse people; in this case, those people number 2 million or perhaps fewer. Focusing on the number of Palestinian Gazans killed misses the point.]

While bombing the Muslim world and the “third world” is not new for America, and whole cities in Iraq and Syria have been razed to the ground in the decades before this disproportionate Israeli attack, what is new is the unmasking of it. The Black Democrat Caucus in particular–not just the Jews in Congress in the Democratic Party, and the AIPAC money flooding the Republican Party as well–has backed Israel. That is the core of the problem and this “socialist” moral and minority uprising.

Hakem Jefferies cannot, and will not, break with Israel and get outraged over their ethnic cleansing. Like Corey Booker, he will say the code words of support: Israel is our greatest ally. Israel has a right to defend itself. The bond between the US and Israel is unbreakable. Yes, even an ethnic cleansing cannot break this bond.

Israel enforces apartheid legally against the “ethnic” people in the territory it officially occupies, as recognized by the UN since 1967. Those ethnic people are, of course, Palestinians, or “sheepherders,” as they’ve been pejoratively described. To side with an apartheid state and stand against minorities in the US because they are “socialists,” so the Democratic Party doesn’t “lose” elections, is white supremacist or Jewish Zionist supremacist reasoning, masked by code words.

American Democratic Value

IV. Losing Elections or Standing for Your Values?

I care about human values, not “losing elections.” I support these “socialists” for their rejection of Jefferies, sent out by the Democratic Party’s core white overlords as a compromised man. It is OK if Tim Scott supports Israel, as it is expected of this party. He is a sambo, a derogatory term for a party that hates blacks.

But to see this revealed within the Democratic Party is far more profound. It means Blacks and Browns are being pressured by their own. At this crossroads, two things can happen: those who fronted Jefferies and the Black Caucus will win by co-opting the minority socialists (once again, as they gradually did after the civil rights movement in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s), or the socialists will split off and form their own party. The Democratic Party will not give up its corporate and Zionist Jewish funders, which is all it has left. The core of the party will fight them.

I think it will happen later, unfortunately. It happened before. Fannie Lou Hamer (and others) attempted to start the Democratic Freedom Party, but it was subsumed under the Democratic Party, which at the time was a bunch of Southern white supremacists who hated her guts (and her allies). Before that, in 1947, a Black minister in Georgia attempted to start a political organization, had a Klan cross burned on his lawn, and was shut down, while Black Americans attempting to register were repressed, jailed, and shot, as detailed in a petition by the Black Civil Rights Congress in a book titled “We Charge Genocide.”

This UN petition has been historically repressed. It seems to have been erased from the consciousness of Black people. Probably the most important document for protecting democracy was erased, and whites and Asians know nothing about it. If they come across it, they will laugh and dismiss it. I read the whole thing, which included my usual excessive highlights and tabs. This is the buried history that the socialists represent. This is the minority equality, fairness, and “justice for all” they represent.

V. Apartheid Apologist

Hakeem Jefferies doesn’t know his Black history. He doesn’t. That is by design, driven by his lust for power and his willingness to sell out the core values this book represents. There are literally tens of thousands of Black Americans documented in this book who were killed, maimed, jailed, beaten, intimidated, and blocked from registering to vote by whites.

Yes, my rough count is in the tens of thousands for 1943–1951, the period the petition covers. They are black Americans, a couple of white allies, whose lives and voting rights whites destroyed through physical violence and intimidation. They were labeled “communists” by the Democratic Party in the two decades before and after. It’s not excusable.

Not only were Black Americans then subsumed and co-opted by the Democratic Party, which used their “hope” against them, as they still “hope” they belong today, but their history was also erased. Over 90 Black Americans, the bravest, smartest, and most courageous, signed this petition to indicate they wrote it. This is why we celebrate only Black accomplishments that are stripped of the 20th-century white supremacist violence that plagued the first seven decades in extremity.

The political violence was so extreme and, correctly in my opinion, qualified as an American genocide that they charged. We can talk about WEB DuBois, as long as his name is not associated with this petition that he signed. The new PBS special on him does so. It isolates him as an individual to be celebrated, as he should be, but eliminates the more important movement the petition represents: the well-constructed legal charge of the worst crime against a people imaginable.

If this book were made into a movie, all the black organizers would see the project buried and destroyed; the black actors in this documentary would be banned, and their careers ruined. Hollywood will cancel it before it gets out of the closet. Only I, a small-time pseudo-intellectual activist, can recognize it for what it is. That is the problem the socialists and you, if you are reading this, face: total oppression. The algorithm will silence you.

Hakeem Jefferies is just the human version of that political algorithm. He is sent in because he can get in the door to crash their socialist party. He can then be used to compromise with them and to compromise their values, perhaps gradually, as many times before.

Are the socialist democrats being used to create the illusion of division within the party, not to mention at the national level? Are minorities being used, once again, so the Democratic Party will “let them” rebel, only to gradually subsume them if they win? Do you think a “real” third party will eventually start?