Wildest Dreams Checklist: "Good Luck And Fine Quality For 10,000 Years"

Lately, I've been paying close attention to the overheard conversations of the African-Americans I randomly encounter at work, in restaurants, in stores, walking down the streets.

I'm rediscovering why I usually tune out such things.

When did we become so uncompromisingly . . . small? When did we become satisfied with living LOW- and NO-impact lives?

On one level, I suppose that this is to be expected from people who are barely making ends meet. What's the excuse for members of the so-called "talented tenth"?

Our thoughts are . . . small.
Our dreams are even smaller.
There is no ambition.
There are no grand visions of making a lasting mark during one's life.

What happened to us?

I look at this and contrast it with examples of other people who made marks that have endured for generations. People who had long-term, grand visions. Visions that were "built to last."

The next time you see a bottle of Kikkoman soy sauce, please be aware that this family-owned Japanese company has existed for 17 generations. Kikkoman started as a small, regional soy sauce business in 1630, using a recipe invented by the widow of one of the samurai of Prince Hideyori. The firm began exporting soy sauce in 1868. Centuries of Success: Lessons From the World's Most Enduring Family Businesses, pg. 27.

The next time you see a Kikkoman bottle, please be aware that the characters for the brand name "Kikkoman" can be translated as "good luck and fine quality for 10,000 years." That's quite an ambitious vision for one's business! The Mogi family also carefully considered the values that they wanted to pass on to future generations of the family and family business.

"In the late 1700s or early 1800s the Mogis established a family constitution institutionalizing their cooperative effort to concentrate talent and experience in shoyu [soy sauce] manufacture at Noda. Among other things the short document noted:

'Sincerity first and profits will follow. Neglect neither . . . Avoid luxury and cultivate simplicity and earnestness . . . Attend to your health. Eat simple foods no different than those taken by your employees . . . Twice a year call a family meeting; praise family members according to their character and not according to their profits.' "

http://www.soyinfocenter.com/HSS/kikkoman.php

Are the effects of your choices "built to last"?

Will the effects of any of your choices endure?

Are you building anything that is intended to last?

What impact will your actions have on life 17 generations from now?

Geostrategy Nerd: The Federal Government Is Giving You A Hint

The participants at this think tank have been discussing the need to escape Black residential areas since the post from 11/18/08 entitled "All Colored People That Want to Go To Kansas, On 9/5/1877, Can Do So for $5.00." http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2008/11/all-colored-people-that-want-to-go-to.html Leaving these Black residential areas is literally a matter of life and death for African-American women and children.

As many Black women's empowerment bloggers have noted, conditions within these majority-Black residential hellholes will only get worse as time goes on. In fact, the federal government is talking about razing sections of 50 economically depressed cities like Detroit, and letting nature reclaim the bulldozed districts! I would expect that most of these cities have substantial African-American populations. Whatever the outcome of this plan, it won't be a pretty picture. The time to get out is NOW.

Here's the beginning of the Telegraph.co.uk news story at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5516536/US-cities-may-have-to-be-bulldozed-in-order-to-survive.html :

"US cities may have to be bulldozed in order to survive.

Dozens of US cities may have entire neighbourhoods bulldozed as part of drastic "shrink to survive" proposals being considered by the Obama administration to tackle economic decline. The government is looking at expanding a pioneering scheme in Flint, one of the poorest US cities, which involves razing entire districts and returning the land to nature. Local politicians believe the city must contract by as much as 40 per cent, concentrating the dwindling population and local services into a more viable area."

Here's a link to a blog post discussing the story:
http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/06/22/us_government_may_bulldoze_50_cities_create_more_green_space/
From the blog post:

"It seems virtually everyone——from Wall Street bankers to small business owners——has been affected by the economic downturn. Now, the recession’’s latest victims may be American cities. The Obama administration is reportedly considering plans to raze sections of 50 economically depressed US cities, condensing these towns’’ shrinking populations and city services to smaller areas. The plan, dubbed ""shrink to survive,"" may seem kooky, but it could be big news for environmentalists: In many cases, bulldozed districts would be returned to nature via forests or meadows.

. . . The list may surprise some, as it contains major metropolises like Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Memphis, as well as other former industrial hotspots. Kildee and some government officials believe that downsizing these economically depressed cities will provide citizens with greater quality of life and more efficiently utilize city services."

Right. Sure. This is about green space, and the remaining inhabitants' quality of life. No, it's more like pulling the plug on a dead patient.

True Fellowship, Part 3: An Extended Reader's Money Quote From Evia

The Reader's Money Quote is a statement that is of such insight and importance that it merits frequent and loud repetition. These Reader's Money Quotes are from Evia, blog host of Black Female Interracial Marriage Ezine http://www.blackfemaleinterracialmarriage.com/. Evia and I had the following exchange during a recent post (my comments are in blue):

Evia said:

However, on the topic of REAL "friends," well I think volumes could be written about that because there are virtually no rules anymore. Therefore, lots of people are very UN-likeminded until the meaning of friendship. To one person, it means something totally different than it may mean to another person, yet both people are using the same word. This causes lots of confusion and disappointment.

For ex. when I was in college I had what I considered a close girlfriend. Everything was fine until she went into the hospital to have some surgery. She was there for a couple of days. She NEVER told me she was going into the hospital!! I only found out later when she came out. I was devastated! We talked about it afterwards and she said she didn't understand why that even bothered me. OMG!!

My take on this is that when you go into the hospital for surgery, you should WANT those people who are close to you to know about it and BE there for you. So when she didn't tell me about her surgery, IMO based on my background, that was an indication that she didn't consider me a close friend. That also told me that if I went into the hospital, she wouldn't consider it important to be there for me either. These are MAJOR values differences, and I knew at that point that we would most likely never be really "close".

However, both she and her mother had been born and raised in NYC (Harlem) and had taken on the whole array of NYC "individualistic" values whereas, I grew up on a rural farm down South and had "communal" values from that background, so our backgrounds were VERY different. It wasn't her fault and it wasn't mine. That was the first experience that made me realize the importance of VALUES and likemindedness and how they determine whether people will get along with each other satisfactorily and have a mutually satisfying relationship. I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm saying it's a lot more difficult.

And this has nothing to do with ethnicity or race because I've met continental African women and white women with whom I've bonded almost instantly, whereas I've met AA women who I know I could never bond with.

This is a very clear example of why people from very different thought systems and value systems cannot jell, in many cases. There are so many unspoken expectations and assumptions that will usually trip them up.

So I have **sisterfriends**, **friends**, and then I have a variety of acquaintances. A sisterfriend is a friend of the 1st degree. A sisterfriend is the type of friend who could live with me indefinitely. I would go all out for her and her children to the extent that I could, without harming myself. She is, in a sense, my "sister" with the full meaning of the word. I would expect her to do all of the same for me.

At this point in my life, I put energy into cultivating sisterfriends, and I've had a moderate degree of success. I'm finding women who also relish this type of REAL relationship. It requires HONEST talk though about your needs. You cannot make assumptions. You have to tell a potential sisterfriend the biggies that you expect and she does the same and then you both have to decide whether you're willing to come through for each other.

I think AA women need friends, but due to the massive breakdown of the fledgling AA culture which eats away at even supposedly close-knit family relationships, I think that every AA woman REALLY needs at least 2 sisterfriends and 3 or 4 would of course be a lot better. That would make a typical AA woman feel a lot less vulnerable, alone. A sisterfriend is a type of insurance.

You know there's a 95% that she'll be there for you when your "friends" and acquaintances call to give you excuses as to why they can't be there for you in whatever way. Also, you're her sisterfriend too. So the sisterfriend relationship requires obligations and responsibilities.

Human beings are not islands. We have been wired to need a variety of others.

Evia, I'm happy you talked at length about friendship. The topic is the very FIRST thing that I'm going to get back to in detail in August. It's the FIRST order of business for August.

. . . You're being very gracious. I grew up in Chicago (as did my parents), and that person's behavior sounds CRAZY to me (for somebody who calls themself a friend). The harsh reality is that there are a LOT of improperly socialized, SAVAGE AAs out there. You described one of them.

And I think it's a very good thing that you mentioned the reciprocity implications involved in this sort of crazy behavior. A so-called "friend" who does not expect you to be there for them does NOT expect to be there for you!

. . . [T]oo many AA women try to rely on their husbands and boyfriends to supply ALL of their emotional needs. Not only is that unhealthy (one person simply can't supply ALL of another person's emotional needs). But it also sets women up to be extremely needy and vulnerable in their relationships with men.

It also sets them up to be utterly destroyed by divorce/break-up. I've seen this happen over and over to women who felt that they didn't need friends or sisterfriends because they "had a man." It's NOT a pretty picture. In fact, I've been observing a BW coworker like this who's in the middle of a mini-breakdown right now because she threw away what few friendships she had as soon as she "got a man." Meanwhile, her ex-boyfriend held on to his friendships with "his boys" throughout their relationship. Now that he's broken up with her, she's almost catatonic.

I don't feel particularly sympathetic to her. She got what she created for herself.

Khadija, re my college chum and your comments above, this was a very eye-opening experience for me--having Freda as a "friend." She had been raised not to trust black people because her mother, a hard-working black woman had had a hard life. The mother was a very bitter bw. She had been preyed on by a good-looking, sweet-talking, womanizing bm. He impregnated her mother and abandoned her. To her mother's credit, she had pinched pennies to send my friend to a private girl's school in NYC and then Freda went on to college, which is where I met her.

Freda came from a very different background than me. She grew up around lots of predators, and with barely any protection from them. Her mother worked 2 jobs all of her life and provided a clean,comfortable home, but there was no time for Freda. Freda had been molested a couple of times while she was a teenager.

My childhood wasn't perfect, but I grew up in a safe environment surrounded by various adults in my extended family watching over me, protecting me. At the time, I thought they were TOO protective, but now I know better. I also always got enough attention from adults. It certainly sounds like you also had a bunch of people who protected you and were there for you.

Even today, I don't think Freda has ever gotten over some of those childhood experiences and the LACK that was in her life during critical periods.

So after my initial hurt, I just accepted her as she was and knew that we could never be "close."

Evia, Thanks for explaining the history behind your college chum. I knew there had to be something SERIOUSLY wrong with that person. It's NOT normal to act like that regarding somebody you call a real "friend."

Yes, I was also BLESSED to grow up being protected and loved by many, many adults around me. Unfortunately, that sort of emotional and physical security are becoming unknown among AA children.

There are a LOT of sociopaths among our people. These bizarre attitudes toward friendship (like what you described about your college acquaintance), and the inability to form close friendships are a part of that syndrome.

That's why I was horrified by some of the statements made during the True Fellowship discussions (which I'm going to revisit in August). I was shocked and appalled to see people say out loud, in public, statements like "I don't want any friends." That's mentally SICK. For real. And it's the kind of statement that I hear from sociopathic clients. IIRC, the inability to make or keep friends is one of the DSM-IV-listed symptoms of Antisocial Personality Disorder!

Peace, blessings and solidarity.

We already know what the problems are. We know that the social fabric among our people has been destroyed. We know what extreme isolation and non-reciprocity can lead to for African-American women and other Black women. http://longbench.wordpress.com/2008/07/03/esmin-green-died-alone/

I don't want to keep talking about the problems. We already know what's wrong. I'm tired of seeing the conversation pattern that exists at many African-American blogs: People go round and round over the problems. If somebody offers concrete, actionable suggestions, these suggestions are ignored in favor of engaging in yet another round of (often insincere) hand-wringing.

For example, I recently watched a heckler-troll at another blog (who is apparently angry with the idea of African-American women divesting from dangerous and non-reciprocating scenarios) completely ignore the list of concrete actions that I suggested she could take in support of an 8 year old Liberian girl who was recently gang-raped by four boys.

She had used this girl's suffering to try to score a debate point against divestment; and I responded by giving her a list of actions that she could take in support of this girl, since she claimed to be concerned about this particular child. Actions that nobody is stopping her from doing, such as: (1) reaching out to the local prosecutor’s office, and local victim advocacy groups to find out what specific needs this little girl might have right now, and (2) coordinating donations for this little girl.

Instead of taking up the mantle of ACTION, this woman repeated her already-answered question by asking the blog host, "The Arizona authorities are taking care of the child, what do you suggest should be done next?" As if it's a reasonable assumption that ALL of the child's needs (including long-term needs) are being met by "the Arizona authorities." Right. Sure.

How quickly people wriggle out of assuming any responsibility whatsoever for taking action! This is the same type of bad-faith nonsense that "Internet Ike Turners" like to engage in (falsely professed concern about issues that they have NO intention of doing anything about).

Let's STOP playing these sorts of games with the life and death matters that are facing us. It's time to revisit some solutions. It's time for people who are sincere and serious to take concrete actions in support of their values. Part 2 of the True Fellowship series mentioned several concrete actions we can take to create true fellowships in our lives. http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2008/10/true-fellowship-part-2-breaking-bread.html

Over the months, I've been delighted to hear periodic updates from a reader and fellow blogger named ForeverLoyal (her blog is at http://foreverloyal.wordpress.com/) about the concrete steps that she's taken to enhance her relationship with a close friend.

It's really up to each one of us.

Departures, Part 2: Let's Revisit Natalie White's Success In South Korea

Now's a good time to revisit an earlier post from April 2009 that discussed a sister named Natalie White. http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/04/wildest-dreams-checklist-will-you-be.html

Ms. White has been in the news, including one news story that was featured on the South Korean government's official website. http://www.korea.net/news/news/newsView.asp?serial_no=20090311001

Enjoy!

Al-Walaa Wal Baraa, Part 2: Why People Betray Their Own Values

Counterintelligence agencies have discovered that there are several basic reasons why people engage in espionage and treason. Security officials often use the acronym MICE as a summary: money, ideology, compromise and ego.

It's interesting to note that these same motivations are the reasons why everyday people act in ways that betray their own values.

I would add "Carelessness" and "social Coercion" to the above list of MICE factors.

There's a science to betrayal and enticing people to act in ways contrary to their values. This science applies to all sorts of seemingly different situations. Those of us who are serious about maintaining our own values, and raising our children to maintain their values need to understand this science.

Strategic Forecasting, Inc., more commonly known as Stratfor, is a private intelligence agency founded in 1966 in Austin, Texas. Barron's once referred to it as "The Shadow CIA." George Friedman is the founder, chief intelligence officer, and CEO of the company.

Here's some background reading I'd like people to keep in mind as we continue to talk about our values. The following article is from http://www.stratfor.com/

"Security Implications of the Global Financial Crisis
March 4, 2009 1813 GMT

By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart

As anyone with a stock portfolio knows, it is a rough time for the markets. With many portfolios down 50 percent or more, this large loss of equity and wealth has been very difficult on individuals and corporations. The problems, of course, have not been confined to the stock markets. With property values plunging and variable-rate mortgages ballooning, many homeowners are also caught in a bad situation — the number of homeowners behind in their mortgage payments has been increasing and the number of foreclosures has grown.

Unemployment is also an issue. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in January 2009 there were 2,227 mass layoff actions in the United States involving 237,902 workers. Significantly, the financial crisis is not just restricted to the United States — it is a global event that is also having a severe impact on economies in Europe, Asia and the developing world. Things are tough all over, and this financial strain will create some large security problems for corporations and governments.

Threats to the Bottom Line

During times of financial hardship, companies often have to make cuts like the aforementioned layoffs. When companies plan cuts, they often focus on eliminating those corporate functions that do not appear to be contributing to the company’s profitability. And one of the first functions cut during tough times often is corporate security. A security department typically has a pretty substantial budget (it costs a lot for all those guards, access-control devices, cameras and alarms), and security is usually viewed as detracting from, rather than contributing to, the company’s bottom line. The “fat” security budget is seen as an easy place to quickly reduce costs in an effort to balance the profit-and-loss statement.

This view of security is due to a number of factors. First, it must be recognized that there are certainly some security programs that are indeed bloated and ill-conceived that have consumed far too many corporate resources for the results they produce. Furthermore, there is a long tradition of corporate security directors who are not good communicators and who do not take the effort to educate upper management about ways their programs contribute to corporate goals.

However, even when a security director has an effective program and is a good communicator, it can be very difficult to quantify the losses that the corporation did not suffer due to the presence of effective security measures. The lack of losses and incidents due to a robust security program can be interpreted by some to mean that there is no threat to guard against. Indeed, effective security can make it appear that there is no need for security, a paradox we have also seen in the historical pattern of U.S. government security funding — a pattern that has resulted in a number of disastrous attacks against U.S. embassies.

In times of economic hardship, the relentless focus on operating expenses and even corporate cutbacks can lead to definite security challenges. As we discussed last November, one of these problems is workplace violence, but during times when people are hurting financially, issues such as employee theft, fraud and product theft by non-employees must also be carefully monitored.

However, while the theft of a tractor-trailer full of computers or flat screen televisions can quickly get someone’s attention, there is a far more subtle, and no less dangerous, threat lurking just under the surface. That threat is espionage — both corporate and state-sponsored.

The Human-Intelligence Process

Espionage is always a problem corporations must face. Competitors, criminals and even foreign governments often seek ways to gather proprietary information from companies, sometimes to boost their own operational capacities (e.g., to apply critical or emerging technologies to their weapons programs) and sometimes to sell on the open market.

Once a company has been identified as having the information sought, the first thing the human intelligence practitioner will do is look for weak links in the targeted company’s operations. If the required information is readily available, there is no need to undertake a time-intensive and costly operation to retrieve it. Indeed, it is shocking to see the amount of sensitive and critical information that is openly available on the Internet and in research libraries, or that is freely given out at technical conferences.

When open source collection efforts fail, more invasive measures must be employed. Sometimes the required information can be obtained via technical surveillance. A faulty information technology system, for example, can expose the company’s secrets via remote electronic intrusion conducted from a continent away. Other times, information can be obtained by eavesdropping on telephone calls made by corporate leaders or by using other technical surveillance measures.

However, technical surveillance has its limitations, and sometimes critical information must be obtained through human intelligence, which means obtaining the required data from an employee working within the targeted company. Due to human nature, human-intelligence practitioners use the same time-tested principles in the recruitment of corporate sources that they use when recruiting sources in the government sector. (The risks associated with obtaining unclassified proprietary information from private companies are often far less than those associated with obtaining classified information from government agencies or national research laboratories.)

The first step in the human-intelligence process is called spotting. This is when the human intelligence practitioner attempts to identify those workers who have access to the required information. Then the practitioner conducts a thorough examination of the backgrounds and situations of the employees who have that access in an effort to determine which employee is most vulnerable to exploitation. Employees who are in dire need of extra cash to maintain extravagant lifestyles or to support drinking, drug or gambling habits, or those who are hiding extramarital affairs or other secrets that can be used for blackmail, make prime candidates.

A background check might also reveal that a certain worker is angry with his or her employer over issues of salary or placement in the company. There also are employees who disagree ideologically with the product their company makes or the process the company uses to produce it. Finally, there are the employees whose egos are so big that they might be willing to risk committing industrial espionage just to prove they can get away with it. Robert Hanssen, an ex FBI special agent accused of selling secrets to Russia, was motivated by the belief that he was above the system and could commit espionage without being caught.

Of the four major motivations for committing espionage — money, ideology, compromise and ego (known to security officials as MICE) — money has proven to be the No. 1 motivation, though two or more motivations can be used to turn an employee. More often than not, simple bribery is sufficient to obtain the desired information, especially if the employee is living beyond his or her means for one reason or another. Outside agents looking to turn an employee can also use blackmail (“compromise” in the MICE acronym).

Demanding proprietary information in exchange for not exposing a personal secret, for instance, is a cost-effective approach that also allows the agent to return again and again to the same source. This method is a bit riskier, however, since it can cause more resentment than other means and make the source more likely to rebel. However, sexual entrapment and blackmail is still widely used as a recruitment tactic, one that has been used with great success in recent years by the Chinese government against targets such as Japanese and Taiwanese government officials, FBI special agents — and foreign businessmen.

Emphasizing the ‘M’

Once the practitioner has identified the weakest link, decided on the approach to take and made a specific plan on how to proceed, the next step in the human-intelligence process is to actually approach the employee and “pitch” him or her. This step is often a gradual effort to establish a relationship of trust between the practitioner and the employee, and contact can begin gradually with requests for small, seemingly harmless bits of information such as internal phone numbers. In this approach, known as the “little hook,” the employee is offered “gifts” in exchange for these favors.

The requests gradually become greater in scope until the targeted information is obtained. Other times, the pitch is far more blatant and the human-intelligence practitioner does not take the time to establish a relationship or gradually recruit the target. Instead the practitioner makes a flat-out cash offer for the required goods or shows the target the evidence that will be used for blackmail.

In the current economic environment, with many 401(k) plans now more like 201(k)s, stock options severely underwater and homeowners facing foreclosure, cold hard cash — the M in MICE — is an even more attractive approach. In fact, with employees seeing their investment accounts decline dramatically, and perhaps even facing the possibility of home foreclosure, it is not at all unreasonable to anticipate that companies and foreigners will face a windfall of walk-in sources who will volunteer to sell critical information — and in such a buyer’s market, information can often be bought at fire-sale prices.

Employees attempting to sell proprietary information are somewhat common; one of the most publicized examples of this in recent years was the disgruntled Coca-Cola Co. employee who was arrested in July 2006 after attempting to sell Coke’s recipe to rival soft drink company Pepsi.

Mass layoffs also complicate the equation, especially when some of the employees being laid off have access to critical information. If measures are not taken to ensure that the information is protected, the information could easily find itself in the hands of competing companies or even foreign intelligence services.

Not Just a Corporate Concern

The current financial crisis — and vulnerability to espionage — is not just confined to the private sector. There are many federal government employees in the United States who have watched their investments in the stock-based funds of the government’s Thrift Savings Plan wither on the vine over the past two years, and judging from the performance of foreign stock exchanges, the investments of employees in other governments have followed suit.

Additionally, government employees tend to live in places with very expensive real estate, like Washington, London, Paris and Tokyo. This means that a foreign intelligence officer armed only with a briefcase full of dollars, euros or yen can make a killing. With many corporate security departments being cut to the bone, many internal security services focused on the counterterrorism mission and many law enforcement agencies chasing white-collar criminals, it is a good time to be in the intelligence business.

One day we will look back on this time through a counterintelligence lens and see that, although it was a time of bear stock markets, it was a tremendous bull market for practitioners of human intelligence.

This report may be forwarded or republished on your website with attribution to http://www.stratfor.com/"

Al-Walaa Wal Baraa---Allegiance And Aversion Based On Values, Part 1

In preparation for the discussions I hope to begin in August, I've been asking the audience to reflect on what values they're taking with them into "the lands of the living." However, I haven't given any concrete examples of why I believe this is important. I also haven't mentioned any of the angles I want people to consider in reference to their values. I hope to rectify that omission with this post.

Next month, I would like to have a series of conversations about what we draw close to (and why), and what we distance ourselves from (and why). These two factors determine the course (and sometimes the duration) of our lives! In terms of Islam, the concept is called in Arabic: al-walaa wal baraa.

For this series, let's work from the specific out to the general. In this post, let's first look at some specific incidents and I'll review them in light of considerations that are part of my particular faith tradition.

I. Preliminary Matters: Why I'm Using Traditional Terminology

For this conversation, I'm going to mostly use traditional terms to describe certain concepts. When discussing matters of faith, I try to stick as close to possible to the terminology used in the Quran, and by traditional religious scholars. I believe that it's dangerous to deviate from the clearly-defined, known earlier terms.

Let me give a secular example. "Messence" magazine has started doing an apparently yearly feature on what it calls "Do-Right Men." Well, the more this was discussed on various blogs, the more people realized that there didn't seem to be any real criteria to being referred to as a "Do-Right Man." From their interviews, these men did NOT sound as if they were ultimately looking for wives. Nor did they even sound as if they were looking for "serious" relationships. Some of these men apparently already had girlfriends.

But yet Messence was encouraging Black women to celebrate and respond to these men as if these men were eligible bachelors. I realized that Messence had done yet another "bait and switch" on its readers. It was encouraging Black women to respond to these men as if they met the criteria of being eligible bachelors (men who are called such because they are interested in and eligible for marriage), when these men never verbally signed-on to the "eligible bachelor" package.

With this verbal bait and switch, Messence was encouraging its readers to pin eligible bachelor hopes onto men who were just looking for a good time (some of whom were already hooked-up to somebody else). This sort of "bait and switch" is often what happens when we get away from traditional, known terminology and start using new terms.

People are then free to define these new terms however they wish. Such as so-called Do-Right Man versus what it takes to be an Eligible Bachelor. So, this Messence example is one reason why I believe that it's safest to stick with the already clearly-defined and known terminology when discussing certain things.

II. Preliminary Matters: Glossary

Fiqh: Muslim jurisprudence. The science which deals with the observance of rituals, the principles of the Five Pillars [the fundamental tenets or requirements of Islam which are accepted as such unequivocally by all branches], and social legislation. The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam, pg. 126, 132.

Al-Walaa Wal Baraa: "Al-walaa means loyalty and al-baraa means disownment. In the context of Islaam al-walaa is loyalty to Allaah and whatever He is pleased with as well as friendship and closeness to the believers, whereas al-baraa is freeing oneself from that which is displeasing to Allaah and disowning the disbelievers." Al-Walaa' wal-Baraa, pg. 3 Shaykh Saalih bin Fawzaan al Fawzaan.

The point is for Muslims to draw close to that which is pleasing to God, and to distance themselves away from that which is displeasing to God. Unfortunately, extremists tend to reduce the concept of al-walaa wal baraa down to "loving and hating for the sake of God." {shudder}

Since I'm speaking to a mixed audience of Muslims, non-Muslims, believers and non-believers, let me put this specific concept into a more general context: I believe that it's essential that we draw close to that which supports our deepest values; and that we distance ourselves away from that which is opposed to our deepest values.

A large part of the reason why the African-American collective is in a state of free fall is because most of us don't have any clear values. Those of us who do have values generally fail to integrate these values into the fabric of our everyday lives. Such people only pull their values out for "special occasions."

Most African-Americans are not grounded in anything at all.

Our lack of basic, firm grounding is also the reason why we are so easily deceived and pulled off course.

III. Preliminary Matters: The Fiqh of Balances

"When interests conflict, an interest of a lower status is sacrificed for the sake of a higher interest, and an interest of a private nature is sacrificed for the sake of a common interest; and the owner of the private interest is to be compensated for his loss. Also in cases of conflicting interests, a temporary interest is forsaken in favour of a long term or permanent interest; a superficial interest is disregarded for the sake of a real interest, and a definite interest is given precedence over a doubtful interest." Priorities of The Islamic Movement in the Coming Phase, by Shaykh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, pg. 48.

"If evils conflict, and some of them are indispensable, then one should choose the lesser of the two evils and the smaller of the two harms. Muslim jurists have prescribed that harm should be eliminated as much as possible. A harm should not be eliminated with a harm of the same nature or with a greater harm. A minor harm should be tolerated if such tolerance would make it possible to avoid a major harm; and a specific harm should be tolerated if it alleviates a general harm.

. . . If interests and evils conflict, they should be examined carefully in terms of their size, effect and duration. A slight evil should be forgiven for the sake of realising a major interest. A temporary evil should be forgiven for the sake of realising a long term or permanent interest. Even a great evil should be accepted if its elimination would lead to a greater evil. In normal conditions, the avoidance of evil should come before the realizing of interest." Priorities of The Islamic Movement in the Coming Phase, by Shaykh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, pg. 49.

A word about weighing evils: It's extremely dangerous. Especially for confused people. Confused people like most African-Americans who are NOT firmly rooted or grounded in any clear values whatsoever. I've made the following comment on other blogs:

"What people don't seem to comprehend is that by presuming to weigh evil, you are putting your hands on it. The taint rubs off and seeps into your skin. It's dangerous to try to weigh evil. Evil must be fought, NOT measured! I believe this is why those people who have settled for so-called "lesser" evils get so angry with people who refuse to compromise their principles. They are usually angrier with the non-compromisers than they are with the so-called "lesser" evil. They are envious of how the non-compromiser stayed clean of the "lesser" evil they compromised with."

There are many times when we have to try to weigh evils and harms in assessing various situations and how we will react to them. However, we must always keep in mind the dangers involved in this process. We must continuously check back with our various touchstones---our scriptures and anything else that we use to guide our actions.

When we don't continuously refer back to our touchstones---or even worse, don't have any touchstones to check---we set ourselves up to be played and to do great harm to our own interests.

This sort of self-inflicted damage to our own interests is the general behavior pattern for most African-Americans. We don't react to events based on clear, firm values. We react based on emotions.

Let's examine some recent events in light of the above concepts. Keep in mind that I'm talking about examining situations based on values. I'm NOT talking about what specific legal concepts (such as due process, etc.) require various officials to do in a particular scenario. Legal codes do NOT necessarily reflect the ETHICS of a situation. Many of us lose sight of that.

[For clarity, I'll add that I support ideas such as "the rule of law," "due process," etc. That's why I started doing defense work. But that's not what I'm talking about here---I'm talking about values. So, let's keep that separate for this conversation.]

IV. The Prof. Henry Gates Incident

Is this a matter of public or private interest? Matters of public interest usually involve concerns greater than avenging a single wronged person. Let's first look to see how the purported "victim" in this situation, Prof. Henry Gates, is treating the matter. This should give us an idea as to what the person directly affected by the situation feels that it's about.

If this was about a principled stand against injustice, one would expect Prof. Gates and his supporters to be critical of everybody involved in the injustice. That's not happening here. The only person that Prof. Gates and Cheerleaders seem critical of is the White, male police officer who arrested him. Not the White female neighbor who made the call to the police department. One might expect her to recognize her own neighbor during the afternoon when the sun was shining. Not the Black male police officer who was present during the arrest. One might expect a Black officer to refrain from aiding and abetting racist police misconduct against other Black people.

Here's part of a comment I made at another blog [Acts of Faith in Love and Life; it's on my sidebar]:

"Another irritant is that we never address the fact that there are often Black police officers present during this type of misconduct. On what basis do we focus ALL of our rage on the White officers present?

I tend to be angrier with Black officers who collaborate with racists. Historically, AAs protested to get more AAs hired as police, and THIS is what some of them do?

IIRC, I saw a Black-looking officer in the foreground of a video still picture of Prof. Gates being arrested. Well, who was that colored boy in uniform? Are any of the outraged AA voices talking about that particular individual? Is there a local Black police officers' league? If so, is this group talking about/to that individual? Are any of these outraged AAs talking to the local Black police group about that person (if such a local group exists)?

The presence of Black-skinned officers during racist police misconduct incidents is not rare. This sort of thing raises the question of whether or not it makes sense for AAs to continue to clamor to have Black-skinned police officers. Maybe we need to find some other criteria to use for lobbying for various people to get hired. Skin color alone is obviously not it.

. . . Faith, yes, from talking to relatives who are in law enforcement there IS what I'll call a "Serpico Effect": Any cop who is not down with the program (be it racist, or simply corrupt) can find themselves without back-up if/when their life is in danger at work.

From what I've been told, this isn't always the case. But it happens enough to keep most people in check.

However, going along with the program is no guarantee of safety at work for Black officers. Even if they 'go along to get along' with racist coworkers, Black officers are still much more liable to be shot BY OTHER OFFICERS when working in plainclothes or undercover. Despite police protestations that everybody's "blue," a BM is a BM is a BM to racist Whites. And if they mess up and shoot a BM who turns out to have a badge...oh well, ooops.

I've heard similar "Serpico Effect" tales from several WW I've known who are in law enforcement.

On a non-life-threatening level, similar career pressures often apply to Black prosecutors---the Christopher Darden Gambit---where they dig a Black prosecutor out of the basement office to be a Black face prosecuting high-profile AAs.

But all of this brings into question one's personal integrity and how cheaply one is willing to sell oneself.

My refusal to be used like that is one of several reasons why I quit my first job as prosecutor after about a year; and it didn't take long for me to see "what time it was" at that office. The crazy/dishonest/racist officers quickly learned that they could NOT trust me to blindly buy into whatever they wrote in their police reports. They also knew that they couldn't "joke" about "testi-lying" in my presence. Unfortunately, there are PLENTY of colored prosecutors that entertain that mess.

Nobody is REQUIRED to keep a job where the work environment demands that you collaborate with evil. Most jobs are not the Mafia---you CAN quit. You can look for another job that doesn't require you to be an accomplice to evil. And I don't believe people who claim that it took them many years to figure out what was going on at their job. NO! They knew. They just didn't care until something happened and they were exposed as the ultra-cheap prostitutes that they are."

Prof. Gates is responding to this incident as if it's about some personal grudge against White, male authority figures. That lets me know that this is primarily a private interest that does not require public intervention from others. Prof. Gates can seek redress through a lawsuit or an administrative complaint against the officer.

What's the size, effect and duration of the harm(s) involved? Is somebody seriously wounded or dead as a result of wrongdoing? From my earlier comment:

"Another irritant is wondering how long will it take for AAs (of all economic classes) to get it through our heads that it's NOT a good idea to have a direct confrontation with racist police out in "the world." By yourself. Where it's their word against yours. Where they could shoot you dead and be done with it.

Why is it that so many of us (who should know better) have not considered how critical it is to keep our heads in such circumstances? Why is it that so many of us (especially so-called "prominent" Black folks) haven't thought through what they're going to do when something like that happens?

Whatever the possible strategies might be in such circumstances, trying to fuss at armed police...by yourself...with their word against yours...is NOT the move to make.

Prof. Gates was blessed that they didn't just put a bullet hole in his head. And lay a "drop gun" (or something else metallic) beside his dead body. These things do happen. And most of us know this. When faced with these situations, why do so many of us still respond as if we don't know this?"

Prof. Gates could have been killed. He wasn't. Prof. Gates could have been beaten. He wasn't. He was blessed that the only injury was to his pride. It could have been much, MUCH worse. Serious injuries and/or fatalities weigh in favor of making the matter one of public interest that requires public intervention.

Serious injuries and fatalities can also weigh heavily against someone who was otherwise a victim in the particular incident. Victims whose inappropriate behavior or bad choices cause death or serious injuries to themselves or others lose much of their entitlement to support from others.

In any event, serious injuries or fatalities didn't happen here, thank God.

Is dealing with this particular incident going to damage a long-term or permanent interest? Let's examine this point in terms of the Black people who were calling for Pres. Obama to speak out about the Prof. Gates Incident. Let's look at what this means in terms of our long-term interests as African-Americans. From my earlier comments at Faith's blog:

"Yep. As I've stated before, this 'racism is officially over because there's a Black president' meme is part of the price tag of having the Obama-ssiah in the White House. One of MANY, somewhat-hidden price tags that AAs have ignored while enjoying our Obama-ssiah-induced-delirium.

. . . Yes, there's going to be various forms of blowback for our Pavlovian, knee-jerk whining about this incident. Blowback that we haven't bothered to consider, much less calculate.

For just one example, the Obama-ssiah has chosen to expend a bit of his "non-threatening Black male" currency with Whites over the Skip Gates Affair. The President (who has to maintain favor with Whites) is NOT going to readily do this again...if EVER again. His statement about the Skip Gates Affair is the only bone he's going to throw to AAs for a LONG time. It might be the ONLY bone he throws us throughout his term.

Since Pres. Obama has only budgeted about 1, maybe 2, "bones" specifically for AA concerns, did we really want to spend one of these bones/crumbs of Presidential attention on Skip Gates? It's one thing if we had decided that the Skip Gates Affair was worthy of using up our 1 scrap of attention/input from the first Black President. But, we didn't make that calculation. Even worse, we're not even aware that this sort of calculation is being made by the Obama-ssiah!

We're too silly to comprehend that Pres. Obama's statements about Skip Gates means that when the next 'Katrina'-type thing happens disproportionately to AAs, then he will feel that he CAN'T afford to respond to our concerns.

In terms of the next 'Katrina' to hit AAs, Pres. Obama is going to respond with the same empty platitudes that Bush used. He will do this because he already spent that 'I'm going to anger White folks' chip on the Skip Gates Affair."

Just based on this one angle, it was NOT a good thing (in terms of our long-term collective interests) that Pres. Obama commented on the Prof. Henry Gates Incident. That's not even factoring in the damage that's done by Pres. Obama saying something, and then diluting or retracting his statements. It's usually better to say and do nothing than to say and do something weak.

Many of us enjoy "sticking it to" White men, or wealthy Black folks, or whatever targets we choose. Or we enjoy giving knee-jerk support to the poor and other people that we've decided are "underdogs." I'm not immune to those considerations. It was a large part of why I enjoyed the political career of former Congressman Gus Savage. He had a real talent for making local, racist Whites VERY angry. It's part of why I've been deeply amused by many of the public statements of a local (White) Catholic priest, Father Michael Pfleiger. Father Pfleiger has a similar talent for infuriating racist Whites. So, I can relate to indulging in these sorts of pleasures. However, NOT at the expense of other, more serious considerations.

I can think of some other angles of analysis about the Prof. Gates Incident (important questions like reciprocity---does Prof. Gates have any personal history of speaking out against injustice, etc.), but you get the point.

V. The Chanequa Campbell Incident at Harvard

We talked about this during some earlier conversations. http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/05/reality-check-african-americans-still.html and http://muslimbushido.blogspot.com/2009/06/postscript-to-racial-discipline.html I won't repeat my detailed thoughts about that situation. But you can run through the partial checklist of considerations that influenced my thoughts about that situation.

Is this a matter of public or private interest?

What's the size, effect and duration of the harm(s) involved? Is somebody seriously wounded or dead as a result of wrongdoing?

Is dealing with this particular incident going to damage a long-term or permanent interest?

You might draw conclusions that are the opposite of mine! *Smile* That doesn't bother or concern me. What does concern me is the widespread African-American mental habit of making knee-jerk, emotion-based responses to anything and everything.

VI. Summary

I would like you to reflect on your deepest-held values.

Where did you get them?

What are they based on?

Do you frequently refer back to your touchstones---your scriptures and anything else that you use to guide your actions?

An Invitation To Pause, Ponder, And Reflect

It feels like we've covered a lot of ground in the past couple of weeks. I see that I've written more than my usual number of blog posts for the month. Much of this was prompted in response to some truly outstanding essays by other bloggers such as Faith and Blue Butterfly.

We've talked about some extremely important matters that deserve further reflection. Let's pause to reflect some more on the things we've recently discussed. I've decided not to write any more new posts for the rest of the month. Let's continue to consider what's already on the table.

I had already planned to study the Quran in search of more guidance regarding the truly unprecedented circumstances that we're facing as African-American women at this point in history. I would ask you to also take some time to read and reflect upon whatever scriptures you rely upon for guidance.

I would also ask you to prepare to turn the page when (inshallah--"God willing") I get back to writing some new posts in August. We've been talking about a lot of dead and dying things lately. This has been necessary in order to warn people about the various tricks and snares used to keep them trapped in the dead zones.

I hope to shift our focus back to our plans to survive, thrive and enjoy a 21st century renaissance in the coming days.

CW, blog host of The CW Experience, has an outstanding post up about the importance of cutting the dead loose. Among other questions worthy of reflection, she makes the following points:

"Probing Question: Can the refusal to break ties with The Dead here on earth cause us the same misery (of not more) as attempting to contact The Dead who are already long buried and gone?

. . . The Bible admonishes us not to communicate with “familiar spirits”…Again this results in death…The living who refuse to heed this commandment are also doomed to be deceived…The above passage refers to someone trying to connect with the dearly departed…I ask the reader to go one step further and consider the outcome of those who consistently remain in the presence of The Dead walking on earth…

-Death only wants access in order to constantly influence the living from the grave…By communicating with The Dead in either case, we are opening doors for confusion and negativity…

. . . There are startling parallels in relation to handling both the physically & mentally dead…In both instances improper handling of The Dead can lead to undesirable results…The implications are clear…In both cases a line of separation needs to be made between the living and The Dead…" http://thecwexperience.wordpress.com/2009/07/20/let-the-dead-bury-the-dead/ (emphasis added).

So, as we depart from the lands of the dead and the dying, let's consider what we're going to take with us on our journey into better days. Let's take the time to reflect on what values, ideas, and things are really important to us. I know that my various Quran translations, my iPod, and a kettlebell are definitely coming with me. I have to sift through the rest of my various types of intellectual, emotional, spiritual, and physical belongings to see what else is really important to me.

What values and ideas really matter to you? What are you going to take with you into the land of the living?

Departures, Part 1: Seeking Our God-Given Rights

It's always annoying to hear (sometimes confused, often oppressive) Black people claim that any African-American (especially any African-American woman) who wants a good life is somehow "acting White" or under the influence of Whites.

That's crazy. And shows that the person saying this madness has never been exposed to actual Black Nationalist thought. To mention just one example, Elijah Muhammad promised to help his followers acquire "money, good homes, and friendship in all walks of life." Here's a modern, current example of one of his followers describing what we are entitled to. Unlike orthodox Islam, the Nation of Islam has female clergy. Over the years, I've always enjoyed hearing lectures by Sis. Min. Ava Muhammad. She's an engaging, dynamic speaker. And it amuses me to be able to relate to her as a fellow former prosecutor and attorney. Don't assume that everybody in the Nation of Islam is a down and out former convict. They're not. [Audience note: I've never been a member of the Nation of Islam. I'm a Sunni, "orthodox" Muslimah.]

Here's the link to a video of Sis. Min. Ava Muhammad talking about what we are entitled to (among other topics).http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8OeCZIToAg

My favorite portions are the following:

She starts talking about what we're entitled to at around 1:51 into the video: "We have a right to have good health, adequate nutrition, good shelter, to be able to avoid unnecessary and non-beneficial pain. To have pleasurable experiences in life. These aren't things that come from a program. These are your natural, human right(s)."

At around 3:36 into the video: "We have got to stop allowing people to teach us that poverty and deprivation is righteousness. That's how we were kept in chains for 400 years."

At around 4:05 into the video: "You have a duty to yourself, your family, and your community to be all you can be and to get all you can get morally in this life. We have to want more and stop teaching ourselves to be satisfied with nothing."

Alhamdulilah! [Praise God!]

We're going to have some specific conversations about making our various departures into better lives. Have you picked a destination? Have you packed ONLY the things that really matter to you? And ONLY the things that are actually helpful? Are you ready to go?

The End Of The Road For African-Americans, Part 2: Generation(s) Apathetic

This essay is contained in my new book. I'm delighted to announce that The Sojourner's Passport site has launched! You can visit it at http://www.sojournerspassport.com/.

Everyone, I can't thank you enough for your ongoing encouragement and support; I truly appreciate it. Your support is what made this possible. And here's a special shout-out to my web designers at Educo Web Design. They're nice people to deal with, and they do outstanding work!

Peace and blessings,
Khadija Nassif