Podcasts about whites only

A Georgia elementary school sparked national outrage after posting “Whites Only” and “Blacks Only” signs over water fountains during a lesson on desegregation. The teacher claimed it was part of a history lesson on Ruby Bridges, but the move left students confused and targeted, and parents furious. Was this an ill-conceived attempt at immersive education—or a reckless display that retraumatized and divided?The Non-Prophets break down the controversy, ethics, and long-term impact.News Source The Independent via Yahoo News, by Katie Hawkinson, April 24, 2025https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/honey-creek-elementary-signs-georgia-b2739151.htmlThe Non-Prophets, Episode 24.19.2 featuring Kelley Laughlin, Eli Slack, Jason Friedman, and Jonathan RoudabushSegregation Signs Posted at Georgia School Spark Outrage

Go to http://www.vessi.com/defranco for up to 35% off site wide until June 2nd. After the 2nd, you can still get 15% off! Go to https://incogni.com/defranco and use code DEFRANCO to get 60% off an annual Incogni plan. New 3-Packs & Cyber Lime Collections NOW LIVE @ https://BeautifulBastard.com ==== ✩ TODAY'S STORIES ✩- – 00:00 - “Pronatalist' Couple in Hot Water After Dad Slaps 2yo Son in Front of Reporter 04:30 - YouTube's Adblocker War, Beast Games Apps Live, & Sabrina Carpenter Controversy 07:09 - Guardianship Laws Affect Millions of Americans but Desperately Need Changes 13:31 - Sponsored by Vessi 14:31 - UAE, American Professor Accused of Sweeping Disinformation Campaign 23:32 - Sponsored by Incogni 24:32 - Tech Staffing Firm Reaches Settlement Over Job Posting for “Whites Only” 26:47 - Gen-Z Is Saying No to Car Culture 28:38 - Minnesota Becomes Latest State to Try & Break ISP Monopolies 30:05 - Comment Commentary Beast Games application: https://beastgames.com/ —————————— Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxwell Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks, Matthew Henry Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Chris Tolve, Jared Paolino Associate Producer on Guardianships: Brian Espinoza Associate Producer on UAE: Lili Stenn ———————————— #DeFranco #MrBeast #SabrinaCarpenter ————————————

On this day in 1963, white civil rights activist William Moore was shot to death at a highway rest stop in Alabama.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this day in 1939, world-renowned Black opera singer Marian Anderson performed on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Från 2010. Det här är historien om Nelson Mandela och motståndsrörelsen ANCs kamp mot apartheid som ledde till att Sydafrika blev demokratiskt. Nya avsnitt från P3 Dokumentär hittar du först i Sveriges Radio Play. Apartheidregimen införde ett omfattande system av så kallade raslagar och målet var ”rasåtskillnad”. De vita hade makten och friheten och de svarta var förtryckta. En svart fick inte gå in genom samma dörr som en vit eller sitta på samma parkbänk. Skyltarna där det stod Whites Only fanns överallt. Regimen hade en stark militärmakt och var en hård polisstat. Apartheidtiden kantades av massakrer, raskravaller, avrättningar och massdemonstrationer. Nelson Mandelas kamp för frihet i motståndsrörelsen ANC var lång och dramatisk.I dokumentären intervjuas bland andra Ahmed Kathrada, som suttit i fängelse med Mandela i 27 år och varit hans följeslagare i kampen sen 40-talet, Dave Steward, president de Klerks statssekreterare, Archie Whitehead, som blev ANC-aktivist på 70-talet, Auburn Daniels, aktivist på 80-talet och Ingvar Carlsson.Producent: Daniel VärjöDokumentären är producerat 2010.

Rod and Karen banter about a fatherhood commercial. Then they discuss Don Lemon gets big settlement from CNN, Mitch McConnell stepping down, Wendy's dropping surge pricing, Lauren Boebert's son arrested, Republican voters vs Democrat voters, popcorn brain, counterfeit condoms, Who News, a Whites Only party gets canceled, San Fran apologizes to Black residents, mom loses disability case after winning tree-throwing competition, woman arrested for masterminding theft ring, man tries to buy car with 78 million dollar check and sword ratchetness. Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@rodimusprime⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SayDatAgain⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@TBGWT⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@TheBlackGuyWhoTips⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Email: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠theblackguywhotips@gmail.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Blog: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.theblackguywhotips.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Teepublic Store⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Amazon Wishlist⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Crowdcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Voice Mail: 704-557-0186

In his Dictionary of the English Language, first published in 1755,  Samuel Johnson did not define the words Saxon, Angle, or Anglo-Saxon. But Noah Webster in his 1828 American Dictionary defines Anglo-Saxon as "adjective. Pertaining to the Saxons, who settled in England, or English Saxons." Something had happened in between the two, and not just the American Revolution, and Johnson's and Webster's different views of that event–but that probably did contribute to the difference. And when Webster published his definition, the term was already taking on new connotations. Indeed, the term Anglo-Saxon has a rich and complicated history, right to the present moment. And so does perception of the peoples to which it refers…or does it actually refer to them? With me to discuss the history of the definition and the ideology of the term is Rory Naismith, Professor of Early Medieval English History at the University of Cambridge, Fellow of Corpus Christi College. Author of numerous books, including Citadel of the Saxons: The Rise of Early London, he was last on the podcast talking about medieval money in Episode 328.  For Further Investigation Content, S., and Williams, H., ‘Creating the Pagan English, from the Tudors to the Present Day', in Signals of Belief in Early England: Anglo-Saxon Paganism Revisited, ed. M. Carver, A. Sanmark and S. Semple (Oxford, 2010), pp. 181–200 Foot, S., ‘The Making of Angelcynn: English Identity before the Norman Conquest', Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 6th ser., 6 (1996), 25–50 [on use of Anglo-Saxon and English terminology in the pre-Norman period itself] Frantzen, A. J., and Niles, J. D. (eds.), Anglo-Saxonism and the Construction of Social Identity (Gainesville, FL, 1997) [a collection of essays - the introduction is probably the most helpful single thing] Horsman, R., Race and Manifest Destiny: the Origins of American Racial Anglo-Saxonism (Cambridge, MA, 1981) [this is really good on the early modern and American side of the story] Kidd, C., British Identities before Nationalism: Ethnicity and Nationhood in the Atlantic World 1600–1800 (Cambridge, 1999), esp. ch. 4–5 and 9 [again, excellent on early modern Anglo-Saxonism] Mandler, P., The English National Character: the History of an Idea from Edmund Burke to Tony Blair (New Haven, 2006), esp. ch. 3 Niles, J., The Idea of Anglo-Saxon England 1066–1901 (Oxford, 2015) Rory Naismith observes, "There is also a welter of very polemical stuff on the web; for a selection, see below" Rubinstein, S., ‘Anglo-Saxon Extremists: the Strange Logic of the Activists who Insist the Term “Anglo-Saxon” is Racist', The Critic, June 2023 Rambaran-Olm, M., ‘History Bites: Resources on the Problematic Term “Anglo-Saxon”', a three-part series on Medium: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, 7 September 2020 Rambaran-Olm, M., ‘Misnaming the Medieval: Rejecting “Anglo-Saxon” Studies', History Workshop, 4 November 2019 Rambaran-Olm, M., and Wade, E., ‘The Many Myths of the Term “Anglo-Saxon”', Smithsonian Magazine, 14 July 2021 Sewer, A., ‘“Anglo-Saxon” is What You Say when “Whites Only” is Too Inclusive', The Atlantic, 20 April 2021 Williams, H., ‘The Fight for “Anglo-Saxon”', Aeon, 29 May 2020 Wood, M., ‘“As a Racism Row Rumbles on, is it Time to Retire the Term ‘Anglo-Saxon'?” Michael Wood Explores the Controversy', History Extra, 4 November 2019  

This week reads like a list of "Things that are just WRONG": NAZI in the House of Commons, "Whites Only” daycare, trolling MLA's - or teachers (or anyone!) - PLUS HEADLINES like: masks returning to healthcare settings, fallen officers, and the VPD testing body cams. We talk it all through. The National Ballet of Ukraine is coming to Canada. Brilliant comedian, Gavin Crawford and much more!

Bowen Island group offers $30 million to cancel campground plans for a regional park. A "Whites Only" poster sparks mixed reactions in Port Coquitlam HandyDART riders are speaking out against a surge in taxi usage.

"Whites Only" poster spotted in Port Coquitlam is generating mixed reactions, but what does the law have to say about it? Guest: Ari Goldkind - Criminal Defence Lawyer, legal analyst and political commentator

Winston E. Allen, author of “DON'T GET MAD, GET RICH” and “LIVE A PURPOSEFUL AND MEANINGFUL LIFE”, newly published autobiography “I PRIED OPEN WALL STREET IN 1962“, is so much more than the title reveals. Dr. Allen's book is fascinating, riveting, historical and grossly entertaining, and has been getting much acclaim from critics and the general reading public alike. The story of Dr. Allen's true-life experiences that propelled Dr. Allen to ultimately form the first minority owned, independent, broker-dealer firm in the history of the United States. The title captures just a fraction of the extraordinary life of the author. There are so many stirring experiences told that the reader was compelled to not put this book down. Dr. Allen's first gripping experience was as a 13-year-old boy, traveling, by train, from New York City to Miami, Florida in a sealed, locked compartment, in 1946 and how this experience shaped his life. Before leaving Penn Station in New York, Dr. Allen learned later in life that his parents provided gratuities to the black porter staff to ensure that their child would arrive safely in Miami. Being locked in this compartment for three days, Dr. Allen would only see the porters when they brought his meals to his compartment.  Before arriving at Union Station in Washington DC, the porters entered his compartment and pulled the curtains shut to make sure no one would see Dr. Allen. Peeking through the curtains, Dr. Allen saw, for the first time, bathroom signs that read “WHITES ONLY” and “COLORED” in bold capital letters. Thinking, since this is the capital, this is the only time he would see these signs. Dr. Allen recalls, as the train traveled further south, the worse things became. This experience had a great impact on Dr. Allen's life and Dr. Allen was resolute not to let anything deter him from seizing the advantages of whatever opportunities the future might hold for him. In 1961, Dr. Allen earned a Fulbright Scholarship to study in Paris at the Sorbonne at the University of Paris. Remembering his 1946 train ride, Dr. Allen expected a similar experience, only to be flabbergasted that in Dr. Allen's own words, “My ethnicity was never an issue.” This was a new and freeing experience as Dr. Allen traveled widely throughout Europe, never once experiencing any type of bias because of the color of his skin. This, again, was a life changing experience as Dr. Allen was determined never to let his ethnicity in the United States be an impediment in his life. Returning to the United States in 1962, from his experiences and contacts made in Paris, Dr. Allen decided his career would be within the citadel of capitalism, on Wall Street. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/john-aidan-byrne0/support

Our Way Black History Fact highlights the first sit-in protest of a Whites-Only library in Virginia in 1939 by Samuel Wilbert Tucker.Support the showwww.civiccipher.comFollow us: @CivicCipher @iamqward @ramsesjaConsideration for today's show was provided by: Major Threads menswear www.MajorThreads.com Hip Hop Weekly Magazine www.hiphopweekly.com The Black Information Network Daily Podcast www.binnews.com

Whites Only! ... Colored! ... No colored allowed! ... These words remind us of a very ugly time in American history. Jim Crow created a caste system that was promoted and adopted that reinforced erroneous belief about blacks. We can't allow this to happen again.  There's something we can do! Now That's Real Talk! www.kwaygospel.com

In this promotion for the www.HRGreenBook.com, Seko Varner teaches how "Whites Only" towns and Terroristic White Supremacy led to a Black Business named the Green Book by Victor and Alma Green! --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/get-on-code/message

After laughing at Ana's injury, Marcus kindly introduced the gang HIS way to spark things off. The gworls dive head first in to the “Miller Family Feud” that spilled over from the nit so comfy couch to the trenches of social media. The colorful convo shifts gears to the “Whites Only” pool incident in the motherland….. the irony

In the wake of Imperial Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor, American men famously flooded recruiting offices across the nation to join the war effort. These stories are well documented and attested by eye witnesses, but a part of this story left out or overlooked is that black Americans joined with an equal level of fervor. Over one million black men and women served in the war, playing crucial roles in every theatre of World War 2. They worked in segregated units and performed vital support jobs.This mobilization did take time. This was during the Jim Crow era, and some black Americans asked if they should risk their lives to live as what one called “Half-American.” But as the war effort grew, black Americans increasingly enlisted as part of what newspapers called the Double V Campaign, a slogan to promote the fight for democracy abroad but also in the home front in the United States and the idea that black Americans wholeheartedly contributing to the war effort would lead to legal and social equality.Today's guest is Matthew Delmont, author of “Half American: The Epic Story of African Americans Fighting World War II at Home and Abroad – the first-ever comprehensive history of World War II to focus on black Americans.We look at stories figures such as Thurgood Marshall, the chief lawyer for the NAACP, who investigated violence against black troops and veterans; Benjamin O. Davis, Jr., leader of the Tuskegee Airmen, who was at the forefront of the years-long fight to open the Air Force to black pilots; Ella Baker, the civil rights leader who advocated on the home front for black soldiers, veterans, and their families; James Thompson, the 26-year-old whose letter to a newspaper set in motion the Double Victory campaign; and poet Langston Hughes, who worked as a war correspondent for the black press. Their bravery and patriotism in the face of unfathomable racism is both inspiring and galvanizing.Some of their greatest struggles came when they returned home. They were denied housing and education. On the streets of Southern cities, black soldiers were attacked just for wearing their uniforms in public, beaten for drinking from “Whites Only” water fountains, or chased away from the voting booth by mobs. Yet without black Americans' crucial contributions to the war effort, the United States could not have been victorious.

On this day in 1961, the Professional Golfers' Association of America ended its longstanding ban on non-white members.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chenoa Murray Daniels is a Performance Poet, Author, and the Founder of Daniels Day Publishing & Consulting. While serving in the U.S. Peace Corps as an HIV/AIDS Health Volunteer in South Africa, Chenoa wrote her inaugural poetry book “Whites Only”. Her book was recently accepted by the Gauteng Department of Education to distribute in public school libraries in South Africa. A portion of the book proceeds benefit Limehill village, where she lived and worked for two years with the Zulu people. Chenoa has performed her poetry in-person and in virtual venues including the Fringe Benefits Theatre (Los Angeles, California), the International Centre for Women Playwrights, the "I Am Free Music Festival" (Sandy Springs, Georgia), the Social Security Administration (Atlanta, Georgia), Bushfire Festival of Swaziland, and Mama's Jus' Jazzin' of Durban, South Africa. Chenoa is a member of the American Writers & Artists Institute and she is the Director of the African American Teen Authors Book Program. Chenoa believes that you can BREAK THE SKY with the purpose God gave you for your life!

Free Transcript: https://elprofepresenta.wixsite.com/elprofepresenta elprofepresenta@gmail.com ¿Hola, qué tal? Bienvenidos a El profe presenta: Intermediate Spanish in Context. Episodio número 6 César Chávez: ¡Sí se puede! La palabra del día es campesino. Un campesino es una persona que trabajaba en el campo. El 31 de marzo es Día de César Chávez. Desde el pequeño pueblo de Delano California, un hombre tocó la vida de millones de estadounidenses e hizo historia. La vida y legado de César Chávez es que mejoró las condiciones del trabajador campesino e inspiró a la humanidad a luchar pacíficamente en contra de la injusticia. Chávez creía en la oportunidad para todos e igualdad en los Estados Unidos. Mejoró las condiciones del trabajador del campo y nos dejó un legado de servir a nuestro prójimo. Prójimo quiere decir otro ser humano. César Chávez nació el 31 de marzo de 1927 en Yuma, Arizona. Realmente, su nombre es Cesario, pero cuando asistía a la escuela primaria los maestros le cambiaron el nombre a Cesar. Estos maestros también le prohibían hablar español. Sus compañeros se burlaban de él por su apariencia mexicana. El racismo prevalecía en Estados Unidos. En ese tiempo, algunos negocios y restaurantes solo aceptaban clientes blancos. Las personas hispanas y afro-americanas no podían entrar a ciertos negocios, restaurantes o baños públicos. Había anuncios que leían "Whites Only". Después de perder su casa durante la Gran Depresión, la familia se mudó a California. En California, los padres de César Chávez trabajaban arduamente en el campo y les pagaban muy poco. Arduamente quiere decir de manera muy dificultosa. César trabajaba en el campo los fines de semana y los días festivos. En 1942, se graduó del octavo grado y dejó los estudios para ayudar a su familia y trabajar en el campo. En 1946, César se inscribió en la Marina de Los Estados Unidos. Después de dos años recibió licencia honrosa. Licencia honrosa quiere decir que la Marina de Los Estados Unidos le dio permiso de dejar el ejército. Entonces se mudó a Delano, California para trabajar de campesino. Un sinónimo de campesino es granjero. Después se mudó a San José donde trabajó en una organización que defendía los derechos civiles de méxico-americanos llamada "Community Service Organization". Mientras trabajaba para esta organización, leyó las biografías de San Francisco de Asís y Gandhi. En estas historias biográficas aprendió sobre protestas pacíficas. Las protestas pacíficas son protestas sin violencia. En 1962, César Chávez fundó la Asociación Nacional de Campesinos. Su primera huelga fue en 1965. Una huelga es una protesta dónde los trabajadores paran de trabajar hasta que los empleadores cumplan lo que los trabajadores piden. Unos trabajadores del campo le pidieron ayuda a la Asociación de Campesinos para negociar mejores sueldos. El 3 de mayo de 1965, Chávez les ayudó a organizar una huelga. Después de cuatro días de huelga, la compañía aceptó las demandas de los trabajadores y los campesinos regresaron a trabajar. En ese mismo año, Chávez y la Asociación Nacional de Campesinos, ayudaron a protestar a un grupo de filipino-americanos en contra de los cultivadores, dueños de campos de uva. En marzo de 1966, Chávez y 50 otras personas salieron de Delano, California hacia Sacramento, California, la capital del estado. Fue una procesión de 300 millas. La marcha contenía simbolismos católicos. Los manifestantes cargaban crucifijos y una pancarta de la Virgen de Guadalupe y usaban el slogan "Peregrinación, Penitencia, Revolución". Una pancarta es similar a una bandera o a un cartel. Llegaron a Sacramento el domingo Pascua de Resurrección. Ocho mil personas se presentaron frente al capitolio del estado. También, en febrero de 1968, César Chávez inició un ayuno para refirmar su determinación de protestar pacíficamente... --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Whites Only

Martin Luther King Jr. - Letter From Birmingham Jail - Episode 2 - There Are Just And There Are Unjust Laws   Hi, I'm Christy Shriver and we're here to discuss books that have changed the world and have changed us.    I'm Garry Shriver and this is the How to Love Lit Podcast.  This is our second week discussing Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and the letter that some consider today to be one of the most significant political documents to emerge from the American continent in the last 300 years, ranking with the founding documents, the Gettysburg Address and the Emancipation Proclamation.  Last week, we spoke a little, although very briefly, about Dr. King's growing up years.  We focused on his rise to political prominence through his political activism in Montgomery with the MIA and Rosa Parks as they led a community to boycott public bussing system for 381 days protesting the unfair bussing practices in Montgomery.   These efforts resulted in legislation that would begin the process of unraveling a 100 years of Jim Crow laws across, not just Birmingham, but the entire South.      We also discussed Project C, C, btw, stands for Confrontation.  Project C was the name given to the program that was designed to combine economic pressure with large scale direct action protest in order to undermine the very rigid system of segregation in place in the Southern city of Birmingham, Alabama.  The project was multi-faceted and by that I mean, it had various moving parts.  It consisted of strategic sit-ins, mass meetings, economic boycotts, and of course “parading” primarily without a permit because no permits would be given.      Yes, and one significant component of this project was planned for Good Friday, April 12 1963.  It would be on this auspicious day that two political and spiritual leaders, Reverend Ralph Abernathy and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., would step out in faith in front of the Sixth Avenue Zion Hill Church to march down those prohibited streets.  And, leading by example, proving that they would never ask anyone to do something they would not do themselves, they walked into what they knew would be a guaranteed confrontation with Bull Connor's tightly controlled police force.  As they marched, they were met by a police barricade, so they changed directions and marched a different way; however, it wasn't long until they got to a second barricade.  At this one, Commissioner Eugene “Bull” Conner's clear orders could be heard and I quote, “Stop them…Don't let them go any further!”   They were arrested, and let me add, this was not the first time these two were arrested, nor would it be the last.     Dr. King and Ralph Abernathy, according to Abernathy's own words were closer than blood brothers.   There was a deep trust between these two men.  If you remember, they had been leaning on each other since those early days in Montgomery, Alabama where Abernathy was pastor of Montgomery's First Baptist Church.  This support would continue even after Dr. King's assassination where Abernathy would follow through with the support of Memphis' sanitation workers that had brought Dr. King to Memphis on the day he was murdered.  Abernathy and King eventually would be jailed together a total of 17 times. Both they and their families would be targets of multiple assassination attempts.      As we think about these two men leading this march on April 12, it's also important to highlight the many different people- both men and women- who were also involved in this campaign that changed the world.  One man who would make history in ways he did not anticipate quite the way it happened was Dr. Clarence Jones.    Oh yes, Dr. Jones.  Dr. Jones is not a native Southerner.  His parents were domestic workers in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and although they worked for some of the most affluent people in the United States, the community was an anomaly and had been integrating voluntarily even during Jones early years. Jones attended Catholic boarding school and then became a notable graduate of two prestigious universities: Columbia University and Boston University where he received his law degree.  Dr. King asked him to come to Alabama to be a member of his legal team in 1960, from there they not only worked together but also became personal friends.  After Dr. King was arrested on Good Friday, Jones, as his lawyer, was permitted to see him on that next day.    What is interesting to me, is that for Jones, in that initial meeting in that solitary confinement cell, helping Dr. King get out was not first and foremost on his mind.  He felt they had a even greater problem.  Very controversially, Dr. King had encouraged children to join the movement and there had been many children who had followed Dr. King, most of them were from lower-income families.  Those children were not behind bars, and their parents were yelling at him demanding that Jones get the money to bail out their children.  In later interviews, Jones would say that the parents of those kids were waiting outside the jail asking, “What are you doing to get our kids out?”  When Jones went to visit King, this was his concern.  He wanted a list of names and telephones of people to call who had money to get this bail thing figured out.  But King had something else on his mind.  When Jones entered the cell, King said, “Have you seen this?”  He was livid.  A full page ad had been taking out in the Birmingham Herald calling him an outsider, lecturing him, demanding that he be patient.  Jones remembers that Dr. King pulled out his copy of the newspaper and there was writing all over it, on every scrap of blank space between the ads.  He had continued writing on any scrap piece of paper in that jail cell, paper towels, napkinds, anything.  King gave these scraps of paper to Jones and Jones smuggled them out in his pocket, under his shirt, anywhere.      Yes, and over the next five days twice a day, Jones would bring more paper to Dr. King.  King would write and Jones would smuggle them out under his shirt.  Remember, this is before 9/11 when everyone was patted down.  Dr. Jones was not patted down. He would take the scraps of paper to Wyatt Teel Walker, King's chief of Staff, and a woman by the name of Willie Pearl Mackey was given the talk to put it all together.       What about the children, what did King and Jones decide to do about that?     It's actually an interesting part of the story and would likely be more famous if it hadn't been overshadowed by the letter itself, but Jones was able to raise money to get those children out of jail.  The famous actor Harry Belafonte got involved.  He called Nelson Rockefeller's speechwriter, a man by the name of Hugh Morrow, who was a supporter when he found out about what was happening in Birmingham.  That Saturday, Jones flew to New York City, and even though it was Saturday, he met Morrow and Rockefeller at Chase Manhattan Bank, and walked out with $100,000, enough to bail out every one of those children.     Wow- well Jones wasn't the only one who had no idea how important the letter King was composing would become.  Neither Mackey nor Walker did either even as they stumbled through the very challenging task of putting the pieces of handwritten paper together, apparently reading Dr. King's handwriting, in the best of circumstances, wasn't that easy to do.  But in this he had been writing furiously, basically in the dark, relying on his encyclopedic memory, quoting Shakespeare, the Bible, Dr. Augustine, Voltaire and many other philosophers and theologians. Some of it was on newspaper, plain paper, paper towels all kinds of different scraps that had to be pieced together.  And Mackey, who claimed all her life to not being a “fantastic typist” typed it up and prepared the manuscript for public circulation.  If you look at the original version which today resides in the library of Samford University in Birmingham, Alabama you will see that the typed copy concludes with the initials MLK:WM noting the letter's author and woman who typed it, the amazing Willie Pearl Mackey- her personal story  is amazing in its own right as she had been fighting segregation herself from her early days in Atlanta, Georgia where, and this is just one example, she quit her job at a hospital in protest because they refused to treat an African-American gentleman who had suffered a heart attack because it was a whites only hospital.    And again- I think highlighting all the people who contributed- like Jones, and Mackey and Walker is important to understand.  When events happen in history, the perception is often they were accidental or caused by the stars or something, but that is never the case.  And in this case, thousands of children, men and women took great personal risks, and they did it honorably for a long time before things changed.  So, as we get into the letter, last episode we finished by reading the first three paragraphs.  I did want to point out that the version I read, the one most commonly found in textbooks today, has been abridged from the original, not necessarily to revise the content, but just to make it more manageable for students.  Today we will read from the original, as preserved in the papers of Dr. George Bagley, Dr. Bagley as a white pastor was the Executive Secretary of the Alabama Baptist Convention and a likely recipient of this original version, although it's not totally certain how he received his copy. This original version is 21 pages long as typed by Mrs. Mackey.  It was released originally to the media in May following King's arrest on that good Friday in April.  It wasn't officially published until June in the large-scale publication Christian Century, a magazine out of Chicago.      So, let's jump back into the letter.  If you are a student, I would encourage you to pause the podcast for just and second and number the paragraphs so you can follow along and reference the exact text we are quoting from.  There are fifty paragraphs in this unabridged version and we will reference the specific quotes by paragraph.  Last episode we read paragraphs 1-3; I hope you can recognize the anger, and the sarcasm embedded in the language.     Read paragraph 1-4    Of course, Dr. King did not see  these men as being of “genuine good will” or if they were, they were  some of  the most mis-informed or willingly blind ministers in the great state of Alabama.  Either way, as professed religious leaders in their communities- bold enough to take a public stand against racial integration- they were about to get a lesson in history as well as Judeo-Christian theology.  Starting with Dr. King assuming the role of apostle, subtly or not so subtly comparing himself to the greatest of all Christian apostles, the apostle Paul who penned the majority of the New Testament, the Sacred Text of all Christian faiths.  In the introduction of his response, he  compares his response in Birmingham to the apostle Paul's famous response to the call for help in the Bible from the people of Macedonia.  In this famous Biblical text, the Apostle Paul had a vision from God, and in this God-given vision, he receives the commission from God, and I quote Acts 16:9 here,  “During the night Paul had a vision of a man of Macedonia standing and begging him, ‘Come over to Macedonia and help us'”.       No, and this wouldn't be the last allusion to the Bible, Dr. King would make, but it informs the reader that Dr. King's authority will not be coming just from himself, but his arguments would be founded upon the words and principles of the Sacred Text they shared in common.      True, and another great strategy Dr King uses, is not only does he use words and principles form the Holy Bible, Dr. King, very successfully and quickly, starting here at the beginning of the letter, uses the ministers own hypocritical words against them.  These men were quick to demand that Dr. King and his followers live by a set of rules that they themselves very conveniently did not apply to themselves.  This will be called out over and over and over again.     Starting in the very next paragraph he quotes these ministers before challenging their words.  They have accused him of meddling in the affairs of others- somewhere where he was not invited to come- which is ironic considering most Christian denominations see evangelism or proselytizing as part of their mandate.  He confronts the hypocrisy of calling him an outsider directly.  He boldly states that whatever happens in Birmingham affects everyone.  He famously claims, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” and that “whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly” he says anyone living inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds.    Well, the “outsider” accusation is addressed pretty quickly and decidedly in the first four paragraphs, and he is ready to move on to the second complaint, the one claiming that HE is the one in Birmingham stirring things up.  Let's read, paragraphs 5-8.    Paragraphs 5-8    He confronts the power structures here directly and highlights the intentionality of what is being done in the face of ongoing violence.  Well before he arrived there was a long history of injustice and the turning of the blind eye by the “city fathers”. I love that he uses that term to refer to the men running the city- it highlights the role they should have played in protecting their citizens.  A good father would never turn a blind eye to his child being abused.  The inference is that  negligence occurring on a broad scale in this city is no different than dead-beat dad who abandons his children and allows other men to hurt them.     He is then ready to open the movement's playbook and describe the thinking and process behind what these men are belittling.  He again quotes the letter from the ministers.  In their letter they asked for negotiation, to which he responds, the purpose of direct action IS negotiation.  He explains the paradox that the only way to have negotiation is to create a tension so great that the power structures are ready to negotiate instead of just ignore.      He compares the tension they are creating in Birmingham to the positive tensions of the mind referenced by Socrates.  When we pick up the reading again in paragraph 11- paragraph 14 as Dr. King describes the purpose of the direct action campaign as well as paint a picture of the degrading experiences of  Jim Crow laws experienced by millions of African-American citizens of the South. Christy, read those paragraphs for us.    Paragraphs 11-15    He starts by comparing the election of Mayor Albert Boutwell to the return of Jesus Christ.  It totally highlights the ridiculousness of those who have hope that a segregationist mayor will bring justice to African-American citizens.    For those who don't understand the Biblical allusion, let's break it down.    So the New Testament of the Christian Bible ends with the book of Revelation, and in this book, there is a vivid description of the end of the world.  Even if you aren't a Christian, you are likely familiar with a lot of the imagery because it shows up in lots of dystopian movies- this is where we see things like the famous number 666, or the reference to the anti-Christ or the mark of the Beast.  The book describes a planet earth that has gone out of control through totalitarian controllers leveraging every available technology to control human behavior.  It's a very dark book, but at the end of it, according to Revelation, Jesus  returns to earth as a ruler, he destroys the totalitarian dominance and leads humanity to a period of divine peace.  What Dr. King sarcastically says here, is do you honestly think Albert Boutwell is Jesus and ushering in Christ's reign on earth- the man is a segregationist, exactly like Bull Conner.  He is not coming to bring divine peace.  Instead Boutwell is a part of the existing power structure that is reigning in terror.  He then begins to vividly describe the realities of a segregated world for African Americans, highlighting the psychological trauma it creates specifically in children.  How it builds, by its very essence, resentment, fear, under confidence, and ultimately rage.      It's very hard to read these paragraphs without feeling sadness and anger.  After describing the experiences of being denied admission into white only locations, or being made to sleep in a car,  he juxtaposes two kinds of laws and the differences in breaking an unjust law versus enforcing an unjust law.     Read paragraph 15     In paragraph 15  he says, “You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws.  …..”  Of course this is something they were all familiar with, but he goes on to school them on the difference between a just law and an unjust law citing St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, and Lutheran philosopher Paul Tillich.  Let me remind us that he is citing all these men and their works from memory.   He reminds us of something all of these men know, if you are a person who accepts the idea of a higher law given by God to man, and that God's law is above man's civil law is subject to the laws of God and when these two things class, it is not only man's right to stand up to an unjust law, but as a leader and teacher of God's law, these men have a divine responsibility to not only know the difference between these two things, but always be on the side of higher law.  He says, “I can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court, for it is morally right; and I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances, for they are morally wrong.”    And of course, in case you don't understand the reference, the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court that he is referring to is Brown versus Board of Education where the Federal Government determined that segregated schools were illegal.  A law, which of course, George Wallace defied with his “segregation forever” line.  But I want to go back to his theological argument because this something every government student needs to be aware of, in the judeo-Christian tradition, laws must uplift the human condition.  The terms Martin Buber employs are difficult for us to understand like an I-thou relationship versus an I-it relationship, but the idea is something most of us feel intuitively.  Laws must apply equally to everyone; what applies to me should apply to you- because under God were are the same- created worthy of respect, and if there is a law that applies itself differently to different groups of people for whatever stated reason, this is an unholy or an unjust law.  Under this theological premise, every Jim Crow law by definition is ungodly and unjust.       Well, it is difficult to follow the deductive reasoning, he is tracing and applying thousands of years of theological thinking to modern day situations.  He explains the nuances of the moral complexities in paragraphs 19-22 by giving examples, examples his minister colleagues would be very familiar with.  Let's read those paragraphs together.    Read paragraphs 19-22    Shadrach, Meshach and Abedego are references to some of the earliest examples in the Jewish and Christian sacred text when in the book of Daniel in the Bible, they were put in fiery furnace for not praying to King Nebuchadnezzar, and for which God himself appeared in the fire with them and kept them from getting burned.  Of course, he references the early Christian martyrs who were thrown into the Roman Colosseum but closer to their present moment, he references that everything Adolph Hitler did was absolutely legal as was all the persecution of Christians that was going on at that very moment in Communist Russia.  For those who aren't familiar with what happened, Stalin rounded of Christians in the middle of the night and they were never seen again.  He took their children, put them in orphanages and subsequently raised by the state to have all the proper views and beliefs.     We have to keep in mind that for us reading this letter in 21st  century, Stalin's communist regime and Hitler's Nazi one are a long time ago and part of history.  But when Dr. King was writing, he was referring to things that had happened during the lifetimes of the people who were reading the letters.  Things, that they not only knew about, but had participated in.  It was they themselves, their brothers and fathers, many of whom had died, who had gone to Europe to fight Hitler's injustices.  It was their Jewish friends and literal family members who had fled here from across the ocean who had been victims to the gravest expression of man's inhumanity to man- the legal racism of the Nazi regime.   It was their Christian brothers and sisters with the same exact beliefs that they had, who were being thrown into prison and slaughtered under the heavy authoritarianism of Soviet communism and legally enforced atheism.  There is NO way any of these Christian or Jewish ministers could defend the idea they had just proposed- the idea that a Christian should ALWAYS obey the law because government by its definition is Godly and infallible.  There is no way they could defend the idea that according to Judeo-Christian values treating people differently and claiming that certain laws or rules apply to some but not to others  is a defensible position by Christian and Jewish ethical and moral standards and their lives and actions in other places on earth was proof they knew better.        We will end today by reading and discussion paragraphs 23-26.  In these paragraphs King references the use of the sanctimonious term “moderate”.  Of course, King was accused of being a radical extremist, and as such, by definition everything he does it wrong.   He'll revisit the accusation of being an extremist  in paragraph 31, but he is first going to address the term “moderate” because that term sounds like something we should all strive for.  After all, that word is positive if you are a “moderate drinker” or “moderate eater” or “moderate exerciser”.      And on the other end of the spectrum, of course, in most things, being extreme is not that great.  You don't want to be an extreme drinker, or eater or sometimes even extreme exercise is too much.  In most political discourse, for example, most of us shy away from being labeled extreme right or extreme left.  But, Dr. King is going to hone in on how these terms, moderate and extreme are labels that people use for other things.  And as such, it is not good  to be a “moderate” if that word is not really being used to mean “moderate” but could be replaced with the word “apathetic”.  Truth be told, by most objective standards, Dr. King, very much, was a moderate.  His methodologies were controversial for that very reason.  There were many civil rights activists that were promoting violence and other extreme courses of action, and he will speak to all of that.   But this term “white moderate” as King explains was often  a cop out term used to disguise apathy to the plight of the African-American in the face of obvious and brutal oppression.  Let's read paragraphs 23-25.    Paragraphs 23-25    On an aside, for those of us who appreciate beautiful rhetoric for the sake of the artful craftmanship of the words and sentences in and of themselves, there is a lot to appreciate in this entire speech.  In fact, if you cross-reference Dr. King's letter with the glossary  from my old AP Language and Composition textbook, you will see that King uses every single rhetorical device and strategy in the glossary.  His craftmanship is diverse and colorful both in his word choice as well as his sentence structure.   But just here, look how he builds his rhetorical climax through the repetition of the phrase I had hoped, I had hoped, notice how he creates beautiful paragraphs by explaining the difference between a positive peace and a negative peace, notice how he creates a vivid simile comparing segregation to a boil that cannot be healed unless it is exposed to light- and even light itself is an archetypal symbol of truth that dates over 6000 years to the beginning pieces of human discourse- and those examples are the ones from paragraph 24.    I like to see you get excited about things like parallelism and similes.    It does come across as nerdy, but it's really brilliant and I think it's worth pointing out that this piece is remarkable not just for WHAT King says, but by HOW he expresses himself..it's done with extreme craftmanship.    True,  I wanted to highlight where we see both the craftmanship of the language intersects with the depth of the ideas- here he compares  the idea of negative peace and the idea of positive peace- because we don't think like that.  What the heck is negative peace- that is an oxymoron.   But he will correctly make the argument that all peace isn't the same and peace in and of itself isn't the goal and in fact, has never been the goal.  What we want is positive peace where everyone is treated with dignity and respect by the authorities, for sure, but also by each other.  Violence will occur inevitably when there is a transgression of this dignity and respect.  It doesn't matter if it is between two people,  or one people against another people, but also by an outside force oppressing everyone.  That is what Bull Connor was enforcing in Birmingham, even among the white population.  Bull Connor was so committed to segregation that if a white citizen resisted Jim Crow by taking down the “Whites Only” sign on his own private property, he would be cited and fined by the city.  If you are a white person and complied, you wouldn't have a problem but you also wouldn't have peace.  King does not encourage negative peace- negative peace may look like peace but it is when everyone is being subjugated, oppressed, and silenced.  For King that is not the goal.  He will also claim that when you have negative peace, the power structures can enforce this negative peace for a while, but eventually tension will build below the surface and violence will emerge.      And positive change without violence is King's goal.    Yes, furthermore, he also going to reference this terrible practice that people in power tend to do and that is to blame the victim when they do things that violate their own stated rules or principles.  These series of rhetorical questions highlight what today we often call gas-lighting.  It is this idea that as a person in power, I do something to create  a no win scenario for you, so that no matter what your reaction is in the face of my obvious unfairness or cruelty, I will blame you for the result of whatever happens.  Everything will always be YOUR fault.      And he again uses example after example of this happening, ultimately landing on the example of Jesus Christ.  Because as every Christian knows, Jesus was falsely blamed and ultimately crucified for making statements that were not acceptable by the political structures of his day.  He was accused of inciting violence.  The authorities claimed it was his fault that he was crucified because his devotion to God made people jealous.  It was his fault that he made people want to crucify him.  It's this twisted way people have of blaming victims for the violence on themselves.    Well, it is, and of course, in paragraph 26 he quotes a letter he received from a white gentleman in Texas, claiming that African-Americans just needed to wait, that change takes time.  King's response to this man is succinct but not without controversy. King claims that time does not heal wounds.  Time is neutral, it is what we do with that time that will heal or not heal.  Let's finish today by reading this paragraph.     Paragraph 26    The beautiful imagery of describing racial injustice as quicksand, and building a picture of we as people pulling people out of it unto the solid rock of human dignity, of course, draws from the Biblical parables of Jesus Christ as he commands his followers to build their lives on the rock.  And although, the exigence of the moment, requires Dr. King to rely heavily on the Sacred Text of Christianity and Judaism, his logical explanations appeal to men and women of all faith traditions as well as the many with no faith tradition.      Next week, we will finish the letter as well as discuss what happened in Birmingham when Dr. King was bailed out by local millionaire, the African-American businessman AG Gaston for $5000.      We will also revisit, the controversial practice, Dr. King had of encouraging children to protest along side their older brothers and sisters.      Yes, and we will see, that it was this controversial decision to put the lives of children on the line, and allow Bull Connor to publicly unleash violence on these little ones, that led to complete outrage and dissembling of the apathetic or “moderate whites” from around the United States, around the globe and even in Soviet Russia.    So, as always, thank you for listening to our discussion today on paragraphs 1-26 of the Dr. King's Letter from Bham Jail.”  Next week we will finish the letter.  If you enjoyed the discussion, please give us a five star rating on your podcast app, also, please reach out to us on any of our social media platforms- fb, insta, twitter, linked in or our website www.howtolovelitpodcast.com.  Don't forget, on the website, you will also find teaching supports if you are an instructor.    Peace out.     

Therapy is not a “Whites Only” mission. It's time for African Americans to break this stigma within the black community and get the help that they deserve. Chat with KeKe and Nikki as they give their take on going to therapy and the positivity that can come from it. Joining in on this deep discussion, is mental health advocate Juwan Lang.Intro Music

This week's episodes are focusing on Black History month and Black Literature. In this episode, I am doing a reading from "The Journey". You are able to get a picture of what it was to live in the South in the 1960's, along with the dynamics of being black. I hope that you enjoy this reading, and that something that is read will resonate with your soul as you listen to Black History Part 1.

Town Insists "Whites-Only" church isn't illegal- Or is it? We debate religious exemptions to discrimination and provide an update on the new federal ruling effective 1/8/2021. 

How did Rauce get those sweet leather jackets? We talk to Leatherman. Jim has a Whites Only policy when it comes to xmas lights. We talk to David Blaine and John Morgan, Jim and Jack fight while Rauce gets a compliment. Rauce Thoughts with Chase Padgett and a return of Rauce Thoughts Theater.

The history book East of East began out of disgust with El Monte’s origin story as the "End of the Santa Fe Trail." In 2012, the city celebrated it's centennial with a wagon train parade based on the sanitized narrative of the southern pioneers whose descendants founded the township - instead of honoring Monte's actual residents, roughly 95% of whom are Latino or Asian. The book’s editors decided that they would investigate the area’s public history, centering the stories of people of color while exposing the truth about the pioneer settlers. The project was founded by South El Monte Arts Posse’s Romeo Guzman and Carribean Fragoza. Fragoza is an art critic, journalist, and poet who's written for KCET. She was born and raised in South El Monte and graduated from SEM High School in 1999. Her creative non-fiction as well as journalism graces several chapters of the book. Guzman was, at inception, a historian in training at Columbia University (as well as a Mt. SAC alum), and now teaches public history at Claremont Graduate University. His family has roots in South El Monte, though he grew up in Pomona and attended Garey High. He served as East of East’s lead editor. The book was also edited by Ryan Reft and Alex Sayf Cummings. Initially, oral histories were recorded with the help of other locals and homies. Over time articles were published on KCET that would eventually become chapters of the book. An older history written by the Works Progress Administration under the New Deal proclaimed the town had no Spanish, Mexican, or Indigenous roots - Whites Only. East of East starts with the region’s indigenous background followed by colonization as the bedrock of its story. This legacy of racism and discrimination gave way to the radical politics of the Brown Berets, Teatro Urbano, and legendary exiled anarchist Ricardo Flores Magon, as well as the Monte boys lynch mob, Klansmen in public office, and a fledgling outpost for American Nazis. Seeing El Monte as a point where a clamor for equality was continuously fomented, if not glorified, East of East documents a fuller identity for the town than the “End of the Santa Fe Trail” (w

Rod and Karen discuss guilt vs shame when it comes to conflict resolution, Will Smith Red Table Takeover, Coronavirus News, Whites Only graduation party, Michigan deputy fired after racist Kamala meme, Black family harassed for acting Black and sword ratchetness. Twitter: @rodimusprime @SayDatAgain @TBGWT Email: theblackguywhotips@gmail.com Blog: www.theblackguywhotips.com Voice Mail: 704-557-0186

WomenVenture CEO Elaine Wyatt previews the 25th Annual Women Mean Business Fundraiser that will take place next month.  Fair Anita owner/founder Joy McBrien explains her business (which will receive WomenVenture's Social Enterprise Award at this year's fundraiser).  Kim Diedrich, City Clerk for the town of Murdock, details the process of a controversial group planning to create a "Whites Only" venue at vacant church in the city.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Portland, Oregon is one of the epicenters of the rebellion against police violence that broke out after the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Portland has a long history of racism and abusive police. David Rovics, a composer, performer, organizer and activist, joins Clearing the FOG to speak about the history of Oregon as a "Whites Only" state, the resistance there, the murder of Michael Reinoehl, the current fires and his work to develop Eviction Defense Squads. Eleanor Goldfield joins Margaret in the first half of the show to discuss current news. For more information, visit PopularResistance.org.

The NFL can’t solve the world’s problems, so can we please just watch football?  Did Trump not read Bob Woodward’s bio, because taking down presidents is kinda his thing.  Will they play the Black National Anthem in the Whites Only cafes which POC are demanding?  Over half of Americans think Trump and Biden are mentally unfit for President, but will vote for one anyway.

Starting to think it is performative and virtue signaling.

Let's remember that a movement was fostered thanks to what happened in the hospitality industry.   Back in 1960, four young black men, who became known as "The Greensboro Four" had the courage to sit at a "Whites Only" lunch counter at a Woolworths in Greensboro, North Carolina. Woolworths refused to serve them so by the third day, hundreds showed up. Then it turned into thousands. Then it turned into a movement. A catalyst for the Civil Rights Movement which swept the United States.   Sound familiar?   While realization came that segregation was wrong, as soon as it hurt the economics of a business, things changed. Because it always starts in restaurants and retail since that's the common denominator among races and classes. It doesn't matter where you live or what you wear, but essentially everyone can afford a double macchiato at Starbucks.   On this episode of "Tip Not Included", Host Eric Levine is back to address the social unrest taking place today and questions "Where's The Beef"? while asking "What's Your Beef"?    Well, the beef has been growing for years, with windows, souls and backs being broken in the process. The beef is being shouted loud and clear across the country on racial inequality and racial injustice. Especially in the restaurant industry where its workers (along with convicts) make 30% below minimum wage.    Hey, it's not called "slave wages" for nothing.   So in this time where our society is being unmasked while we're being asked to don one, it's worthwhile asking how stunned you are -- without a stun gun -- that people are taking to the streets to voice their beef. Blacks, Whites, Asian, Latinos. Even vegans.   Contact Eric at: erictipnotincluded@gmail.com

This show on the racism and riots in our country was recorded last Monday. This is not a news show. This doesn't cover autopsy reports or the President's appearance at various churches/shrines. It walks through bits of history (Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921, Reconstruction, Whites Only drinking fountains, etc.) and commentary on today's violence. Start with the JP2 quote from Christifidelis Laici in the show notes. Then listen.

In this episode, I speak with Chenoa hARTherapy Murray, author, public health specialist, diversity education facilitator, and international collaborator. She is a globally-minded and collaborative professional with exceptional intercultural skills. Chenoa’s inaugural book, Whites Only is a poetry collection mostly inspired by her experience as a U.S. Peace Corps Volunteer in the Rainbow Nation of South Africa. It touches on social justice and cultural diversity.You will LOVE getting to know this beautiful (inside and out) woman that I am fortunate enough to call my friend. Chenoa has this infectious, high energy that just won’t accept anything less than abundant joy for herself and those she loves.During our conversation, we talk about how Chenoa came to her middle name, what it takes to become an author, and what surprise career choice she made that is turning into a national book tour.Chenoa shares tips and tricks that you don’t want to miss. She will reveal some life-changing moments and how she created some good ol’ fashioned lemonade from lemons while in South Africa. Be sure to grab your notebook ladies! This is going to be a notetaking session! Connect with Chenoa:https://www.instagram.com/whitesonlythebook/https://www.linkedin.com/in/chenoamurray/https://www.facebook.com/chenoa.murrayBuy her book hereAmazon

For many young people, participation in the Civil Rights Movement began with a membership in the NAACP. In this episode, Franzetta Sanders of Moss Point recalls joining the group and the work they did to promote Equality for all. During the 1960s, members of the NAACP would test local businesses for compliance with new Civil Rights laws.  Franzetta Sanders describes their work in Moss Point and how the community reacted. In the Jim Crow South, there were separate public restrooms marked for “Whites Only” and “Blacks Only.” Sanders recounts how a stopover at the Hattiesburg bus station resulted in their bus being surrounded by police. Most Mississippi public schools did not begin to fully integrate until 1970. As the mother of six children, Sanders worked to make sure they had the best educational opportunities possible. She remembers those difficult early days and how things eventually got better. During the Civil Rights Movement, Sanders worked diligently to break down racial barriers. She expresses frustration at the apathy of young people who are reluctant to join the NAACP. This episode of Mississippi Moments was researched by Lucas Somers, and produced by Ross Walton, with narration by Bill Ellison. PHOTO: USM Digital Collections – Herbert Randall

I love a glass of pinot on the weekends like nobody's business. I'm finding that not everyone will allow you to simply enjoy it! (Do we in 2019 still have Whites Only businesses?)

By the time you’re reading this Wil might be far away, Court has never done anything wrong in her life and Leif tries to bring Sexy Back but instead drops a HUGE spoiler! It’s a NEW episode of the Narcisistas! We might as well set the studio on fire cause it’s that HOT! Today we’re talking SORRY (I AIN’T SORRY) and it’s RIDICUL dude! SORRY is one of the MAGIC words... when do we say it, when do we not? When are apologies genuine and when are they not (ahem... KEVIN HART)? We get real about what it means to be gay in the black community but then Wil lightens it up with an inspirational freestyle! Friend of the pod CATHOLICISM stops by because of course GOD listens to the pod (sorry we’ve been drunk sluts!) What’s our fave WHITES ONLY music video we’re not apologizing for? Forgiveness versus accepting an apology, some fun Real Estate related unforgiveness and a LOT of appearances from Court’s 2019 catchphrase! Apologize less, don’t say sorry when you mean thank you and an EPIC Bey outro that just might have you poop your pants! LISTEN TO THIS EP! RATE! REVIEW! FOLLOW! REPOST! SUBSCRIBE! VISIT www.narcisistas.com! God you’re stunning... now go apologize!!

In the 1970’s Bruce Lee captivated African American audiences with his stylish and philosophical kung fu movies. Lee was a rarity—a non-white leading man fighting oppression, crime, and racism at a time when there were still signs that read: “No dogs or Chinese Allowed” and “Whites Only.” Through the physical, mental, and spiritual embodiment of martial arts, Lee modeled an intense pride in his own cultural heritage that was an inspiration to all people of color—especially young African American men. In a special gathering to commemorate the 45th anniversary of Lee’s passing, Emmy Award-winning comedian and author W. Kamau Bell, Bruce Lee biographer and cultural critic Jeff Chang, Bruce Lee’s daughter Shannon Lee, along with moderator and cultural anthropologist Sharon Ann Lee will explore Bruce Lee’s long-lasting legacy and how he became an unexpected icon for Afro-Asian unity.

Ep. 312 | Originally aired: March 31 - April 2, 2018 Imagine the courage of a young black man in the Jim Crow South to sit at a “Whites Only” lunch counter; to need a military escort for a bus ride; to be assaulted by the Ku Klux Klan, and, through it all, remain committed to non-violence. Dr. Bernard LaFayette has done just that, he joins us this week on Story in the Public Square. Learn more. 

Today our expert guest is Hunter Doherty “Patch” Adams, who is best known for his work as a medical doctor and a clown – however, he is also a social activist who has devoted over 40 years of his life to changing America's healthcare system.   Patch believes that laughter, joy, and creativity are integral parts of the healing process and, with the help of friends, he founded The Gesundheit! Institute in 1971 in order to address problems with the country's health care model.   Patch's life changed when he saw a “Whites Only” sign on a water fountain. It confounded him that society allowed it, and he struggled against society for his teen years because he couldn't be silent.   After being present for Martin Luther King, Jr. delivering the “I have a dream…” speech, Patch realized that he could make revolution.   “I did not have to develop into a person to make revolution – I was that person. I just had to decide what I was going to do.” Patch decided to do two things: Be a free doctor. As a political act, he decided to never have another bad day. Instead, he lives six qualities: happy, loving, funny, cooperative, creative, and thoughtful.   The Love Revolution & The Gesundheit Institute   Patch's revolution is built on a simple concept: When you care, it is an act of love – and, ideally, a healthy person loves all people.   He did not, however, see any place for that compassion in American hospitals.   “Medicine felt like a business, and I knew if I was going to be a doctor I could never do it in an American hospital – I had to make my own hospital.”   When Patch signed contracts for the 1998 Robin Williams movie, he was told they'd build a hospital building in return – to this day, there is still no hospital. However, Patch is still striving towards this mission every day. You can support the hospital project by donating to The Gesundheit Institute or purchasing Patch's book, Gesundheit!   The Biggest Helping: Today's Most Important Takeaway   “Make love our values. Stop your troubles, become proactive for love, and help change the world.” --   Thank you for joining us on The Daily Helping with Dr. Shuster. Subscribe to the show on iTunes, Stitcher, or Google Play to download more food for the brain, knowledge from the experts, and tools to win at life.   Resources: Donate to The Gesundheit Institute Connect with The Gesundheit Institute: Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | YouTube Read: Gesundheit!

Ephesians 2:11-22 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. The history of segregation, systemic injustice, and slavery has left a gaping wound in America. For those who are unwilling to either understand the work of the gospel, or the history of prejudice in our nation, they, will go through life blind to the hope for unity and love. They will be lazy to the work of the gospel and form a Jesus who blesses them, while telling others to just pull yourself up by your bootstraps. While we have come far from the days of "Whites Only", there seems to be a new face of racism popping up, not only in our cities, but in our churches. We are committed to the Ministry of Reconciliation as Christ our King has given us. Join us as we do our best to listen, be vulnerable, and worship Jesus who broke down the dividing wall of hostility.

Ephesians 2:11-22 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. The history of segregation, systemic injustice, and slavery has left a gaping wound in America. For those who are unwilling to either understand the work of the gospel, or the history of prejudice in our nation, they, will go through life blind to the hope for unity and love. They will be lazy to the work of the gospel and form a Jesus who blesses them, while telling others to just pull yourself up by your bootstraps. While we have come far from the days of "Whites Only", there seems to be a new face of racism popping up, not only in our cities, but in our churches. We are committed to the Ministry of Reconciliation as Christ our King has given us. Join us as we do our best to listen, be vulnerable, and worship Jesus who broke down the dividing wall of hostility.

Rod and Karen discuss Facebook name harassment, Gladys Knight sues her son, Sarah Palin hits her head and blames HRC, almost half of homes in the US have guns, Anthony Weiner sexting again, clown tries to lure kids, Homeless chic, Zara price gouging suit, Erica Mena goes at Slut Walk movement, burkini ban overturned, Lil Yachty, Mark Burns, Kapernick outrage, Whites Only clause in neighborhood, man defends himself because he watched TV, cop accidentally films himself stealing, woman bails her friend out with stolen credit card and sword ratchetness. Twitter: @rodimusprime @SayDatAgain @TBGWT Email: theblackguywhotips@gmail.com Blog: www.theblackguywhotips.com Voice Mail: 704-557-0186

It might have seemed like a good idea to a social studies teacher; illustrate for your high school class what segregation was like by putting up "Whites Only" and "Blacks Only" signs above the school restrooms and water fountains. Only problem was the principal of Concord High in Elkhart, Indiana didn't know the teacher was doing that...and just saw the signs.

Coast to coast communities are celebrating Martin Luther King, Jr. Day this year by rejecting the watered-down version of Dr. King and lifting up the Dr. King who questioned capitalism, who saw the connections between racism, militarism and economic injustice and who promoted independent politics. We will speak about Dr. King’s politics and how they relate to the current economic and political environment. We will also talk about the current protests. Kymone Freeman who is co-founder of We Act Radio and also a leading organizer of DC Ferguson and other local groups demanding police reform will be our guest. He will also speak about his new play, “Whites Only.” We will also be joined by Jasiri X and Cat Brooks. For more information, visit www.ClearingtheFOGRadio.org.

History is Power: The Civil Rights Movement   Welcome back to robinlofton.com where we are remembering history and we’re making history!  Today, we are continuing with next part of our History is Power Lecture series.  Today’s lecture is about Civil Rights but let’s back up for a moment for those who are just joining us or to refresh our memory.   Remember, we began by asking why it is important to know African American history. I think that the legendary Jackie Robinson answered that question by encouraging us to believe in fairy tales. Remember on his first day playing with the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1947, he almost could not believe it because he thought that an African American might not ever play in the major leagues and he thought that he would never be the first to do so.  But they did and he was the first. So, he says that he believes in fairy tales…that fairy tales do come true because it happened to him. At the end of the first lecture, we concluded that if it could happen to him, then it can happen to you, too. We learn history for inspiration, insight, the success stories, the struggles, and the knowledge that nothing can stop you, but you.   In the second History is Power! lecture called “Coming to America,” we studied how the ancestors of most African Americans came to America. We discussed the terrible and violent institution of slavery and how it affected our families, culture and traditions. We also discussed the movement to abolish slavery.  The great orator, author, and abolitionist Frederick Douglass gave us insight into how slaves were deprived of the most basic rights and dignity and how, even at an early age, he knew that this was indecent and wrong. We also heard from a former librarian of congress who reminded us that “trying to plan for the future without a sense of the past is like trying to plant cut flowers.”  Slavery is one part of African American history and, we can choose to feel pride and strength that our ancestors fought, struggled, and endured so that we could live and thrive.    So far, in our history is power lecture series, we have learned to believe in fairy tales and that we must never plant cut flowers.   I hope that you will listen to those previous lectures if you have not done so already or just feel free to listen to them again if you need a review or a bit of inspiration. And please leave your comments, experiences, or questions about these topics. We have a great community at robinlofton.com and everyone is welcome.   So, what’s next?   The fight for freedom (abolition of slavery) was the first step.  The next step was the struggle for equality.  So, here is where we examine the Civil Rights Movement. By the way, in the first lecture, I said that we would examine roughly 400 years of African American history (from the time when the first Black person arrived in the American colonies to the present day). I’m sure that some of you made a heavy sigh and thought that this would be a long and tedious series. But—surprise, surprise!—we have already completed about 350 years of African American history!    I’m sure that most people—young and old—have some knowledge of the civil rights movement. That’s great! But I’m going to try to expand the modern (or understood) notion of civil rights and the African American struggle for equality. It has not been an easy road; it has been a road with bumps, twists, and turns but it was always headed in the same direction: equality. The road was lined with hardships, disappointment, struggle, and violence but it was the road that needed to be taken.   Following the abolition of slavery in (what year? Great! 1865), African Americans worked to establish a strong foundation for themselves and their families.  Yes, it’s true that some former slaves left the United States and moved back to Africa. However, most former slaves had been in the United States for generations and therefore chose to stay. Also, it was a land of great opportunity and resources.   Still, even though slavery was abolished, Blacks were still not considered equal in the eyes of the law or the eyes of their fellow Americans.  Remember that many people who opposed slavery did not envision Whites and Blacks as living together in peaceful harmony. And they did not want Blacks to have rights equal to white Americans, including the right to vote, receive an education or full citizenship rights.  Blacks were considered lower-class citizens.  You see, freedom was just the first step, it was a huge and essential step, but it was just the beginning.   But you might be asking now: why did people wait until the 1960s to start fighting for equality?                                                                           Great question. My answer:  They didn’t wait.   African Americans and others started fighting for civil rights immediately after the abolition of slavery. (In fact, one might well argue that abolition was the first fight for civil rights!) Who were these people or groups fighting for civil rights?   There were so many that they can’t all be named here, but I do want to name a few. Some names might be familiar—I hope they’re familiar--but they might not typically be associated with civil rights. Others might be completely new—and that’s okay too—we’re here to learn.     National Negro Convention. Founded in 1830, the very first National Negro Convention met for five days in Philadelphia to “devise ways and means for bettering of our condition,” and to fight oppression and promote universal education. This is very interesting because slavery was still legal at that time (1830) and yet these free African Americans were pursuing ways to improve the Black condition in the United States. Following abolition of slavery, the conventions focused on voting rights, fair employment, education, citizenship rights, and the repeal of laws that discriminated against African Americans.  This was an early version—or a precursor—to the modern civil rights movement.   Have you heard of Ida B. Wells?   Born in 1862, Ida B. Wells was a courageous and bold civil rights leader, a hardworking editor, and a passionate speaker and writer.  She fought against the practice of lynching. In this way, Ida B. Wells analyzed the reasons and effects of lynching with depth and insight.  She founded a newspaper and wrote a groundbreaking book about lynching called: Southern Horrors: Lynching Law in All Its Phases, which was the first real research done on that terrible practice.  Ida B. Wells concluded that armed resistance was the only defense against lynching.    She was also a suffragette and worked hard for the rights of mothers in the workplace.  A little known fact about her was that she was the first African American to win monetary damages in court.  Just a quick story about it: On a trip to Ohio in 1885, Ida B. Wells was told to give up her seat on a train and move to the smoking car. She refused and was physically dragged by three men to a car for “colored” people. She later sued and was awarded $500. However, the appeals court reversed the decision. That doesn’t matter; she was bold enough to stand up to the injustice and to fight in the courts.  Ida B. Wells was a strong leader in the early movement for civil rights—for African Americans and for women.   Carter G. Woodson. Is his name familiar? He founded Black History Month. Let’s back up. Born in 1875, Dr. Woodson was the son of former slaves.  He was always interested in learning and, in 1912, he became the second Black person to receive a doctorate from Harvard University. (WEB Dubois was the first.) His focus was on African American history. He wanted people to recognize the contributions of African Americans but realized that this was never taught or even acknowledged. He started National Negro Week in 1926. This was later expanded to the entire month of February. He also founded the Association of African American Life and History, which is celebrating its centennial anniversary this year. He wrote more than a dozen books, most notably the iconic Mis-education of the Negro, which is still relevant and useful even today. His contributions and continuous commitment to teaching and spreading African American history and culture in the United States have made these subjects essential parts of educational curricula throughout the country. For this reason, he is known as the father of Black History.  He was certainly one of the important leaders in the early civil rights movement.   Another icon in education was Mary MacLeod Bethune who was super-charged to make sure every child received an education. She founded an innovative school for African American girls. The girls worked hard in this school, which opened at 5:30 every day and closed at 9:00 every night. And Mary Macleod Bethune taught there every day. She eventually founded Bethune-Cookman University.  In 1935, Mary Macleod Bethune founded the National Council of Negro Women, which was the first organization focused on the rights and needs of black women. She tirelessly fought for equality in education, voting rights, and for equal rights for women in the armed forces.   Writers also helped to propel the early civil rights movement—often by helping us to see our world in a new and different way. Richard Wright wrote Black Boy in 1945, which compared and critiqued the black experience in the North and South. The Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison illustrated the social and intellectual issues facing African Americans in the early 20th century. Black Like Me by John Howard Griffin took a unique approach to comparing the lives and experiences of blacks and whites in the Deep South in the 1950s.  And we can never forget one of the most important books in American literature, Their Eyes were Watching God, by Zora Neale Hurston who bravely told her story with beauty, wit and wisdom. That book changed everyone who read it.   But it was not until the 1950s that the modern civil rights movement took form and leadership.  Some people say that one event in particular started the civil rights movement: the lynching of young Emmett Till in August 1955.  In fact, this terrible event brought national awareness to the horrors of lynching (words from Ida B. Wells). And the fact that it happened to a child (Emmett was only 14 years old) made it particularly reprehensible. Lynchings were occurring at an alarming rate for over a century. Remember this is what Ida B. Wells was fighting for so long.   Other injustices and degradations were occurring on a regular and consistent basis.  An organized movement was nearly inevitable. As Blacks moved away from the gripping oppression and violence of the Southern states and became educated, organized and more financially stable, the movement toward civil rights evolved.         This movement happened on two equally important fronts:   Passive resistance by group efforts—marches, protests, demonstrations, boycotts, sit-ins and stand-ins.   The second front we will cover in the next podcast: Law (new laws like the Civil Rights Act) and landmark Supreme Court cases like Brown v. Board of Education. But those are for the next podcast.   Let’s take a quick look at the first two approaches to the fight for equality.   Passive Resistance.  This term and approach were made famous by Mahatma Gandhi.  Passive Resistance or Civil Disobedience was used quite effectively in the fight for civil rights in America.  This is probably the “front” that most people remember when thinking of the civil rights movement. And the Southern Christian Leadership Council (the SCLC, founded  in 1957) with Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. as its first president was at the forefront of this peaceful movement.  It used marches, protests, demonstrations, boycotts, sit-ins and many other “disobedient” actions.    One effective approach involved boycotts.  One of the most effective boycotts took place in Montgomery, Alabama. This was the famous Montgomery Bus boycott, which started on December 5, 1955. This was an immediate response to the arrest of Rosa Parks who had refused to give up her seat to a white person on a bus. Led by the newly formed Montgomery Improvement Association (a precursor to the SCLC), the boycott lasted 381 days. To help with transportation, churches rented cars, station wagons and other vehicles to take people to work, home and school. Carpools became the norm.  The boycott put enormous economic pressure on the Montgomery bus system, which finally agreed to end segregation on its buses. And the U.S. Court of Appeals also invalidated segregation on all buses in Alabama in Browder v. Gayle—we’ll discuss that next time.   Boycotts were used throughout the Civil Rights Movement to put economic pressure on companies or stores to change their unfair and unequal rules and practices. They were difficult but effective. The Montgomery bus boycott took the movement to a new level of depth and organization. The modern Civil Rights Movement had begun!   Another effective tool used in the modern Civil Rights Movement—made possible with newly-organized efforts and clear goals--were marches and protests. The March on Washington is one of the most famous marches in US history. It was held on August 28, 1963.  Did you know full name of this march was the March on Washington for jobs and freedom? The march was designed to focus national attention on racial equality and to pressure the president and Congress to pass a Civil Rights law. It was the largest protest march in the country up to that time, with more than 250,000 people (both Black and White) joining the march. It involved entertainers, performances, and speakers of whom the most famous was Dr. King who gave his iconic “I Have a Dream” speech. After the march, civil rights leaders met with a previously reluctant President Kennedy who finally promised to push for anti-discrimination legislation. It was actually President Johnson who signed the Civil Rights Act, but we’ll discuss that next time.               There were many marches that occurred during this period. The last two marches that we’ll discuss today were focused on voting rights in Dallas County, Alabama. No not Texas, but Alabama.  This area was part of what was called the Black Belt.  Many white residents strongly (sometimes violently) resisted voter registration by African Americans in that region. Violence, intimidation and threats were used to prevent blacks from registering to vote. Because of these tactics, only 1 percent of blacks were registered to vote in that Dallas County. Selma was the seat of Dallas County so that was where the marches and protests were focused.   The SCLC and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (or SNCC) that was founded in 1960 with Marion Barry as its first president organized voter registration campaigns and marches in Selma.  There were a series of marches in January and February of 1965. During one of the marches, Jimmy Lee Jackson, who was peacefully participating, was shot and killed by an Alabama State Trooper.   On March 7, the SCLC and SNCC organized a march to publicize and protest his killing by the state trooper. This became the infamous bloody Sunday march. Alabama state troopers and local law enforcement officers demanded that the 600 protesters immediately disband. When they refused, the troopers attacked with tear gas, billy clubs, dogs, and hoses. More than 50 marchers were seriously injured or hospitalized. This tragic event was televised and has become an iconic view of the southern response of the civil rights movement. But that was not the end of the story in Selma.   Another very important march started two weeks later. It was a 5-day, 50-mile march from Selma to Montgomery. The goal was to promote and secure voting rights for African Americans, the passage of a voting rights act. More than 8,000 people participated in this march, which peacefully arrived in Montgomery on March 25. The Voting Rights Act was passed 5 months later. More information on that next time.   Sit-ins and stand-ins were another effective and sometimes dangerous approach to challenging unfair store policies that would not allow Blacks to sit or be served at lunch counters. How did sit-ins work?  A group of African Americans would fill all the seats at a lunch counter and ask to be served. The store would refuse to serve them. However, they would remain seated there for hours—usually until the store closed. The protesters (people who were engaged in the sit-in) would be subjected to physical, verbal abuse and threats. Hot coffee would be thrown on them; food, water and other items would be thrown at them.  Many times, the protesters were arrested. They were quickly replaced at the lunch counter by more protesters.   These sit-ins took place at stores like Woolworths that refused to serve Black people.  Stand-ins were equally effective against movie theatres that wouldn’t allow African Americans to buy tickets to the movie.  Blacks would stand in line in large numbers and ask to buy tickets. After they were denied, they would get into line again and request a ticket. Eventually, stores and movie theatres changed their policies and started patronizing African Americans but it was a dangerous and difficult time. The brave protesters (who were often high school or college students) were persistent in their pursuit of equal treatment in public facilities.   One of the first sit-ins was held in Oklahoma City in 1958 where NAACP Youth Council members sat at the “whites only” restaurant counters. They were served without incident or publicity. But, unfortunately, all sit-ins did not achieve these immediate results or end without violence.   The first sit-in movement to achieve widespread results was initiated on February 1, 1960 by four Black students who sought service at a Woolworth’s “whites only” lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina. The sit-in gained momentum and within 10 days had spread to 15 cities in five states. On March 16, the city of San Antonio became the first southern city to integrate its lunch counters as a result of this movement.    Finally, let’s end this section with a brief look at the Freedom rides, which actually began in 1947.  The freedom rides tested segregation in busing and interstate travel. In that year, the rides were testing the implementation of a Supreme Court decision that had prohibited segregated seating on buses travelling among the states. Twelve people were arrested in Virginia and North Carolina but later released. This outcome occurred on other freedom rides through the southern states but they also turned violent in some cases. On May 4, 1960, another interracial group of freedom riders boarded public buses in Washington, DC heading through the south to New Orleans. When they reached Alabama, the violence began. One bus was firebombed in Anniston, Alabama. Another bus was attacked by a mob of whites in front of the sheriff’s office that didn’t provide any protection to the riders. Upon arriving in Montgomery, Alabama, the riders were viciously attacked by hundreds of whites.  President Kennedy sent federal marshals and Governor Patterson declared martial law. After long negotiations between the president and Mississippi senator James Eastland, the freedom riders were arrested in Jackson. More riders arrived and they continued to be arrested. Hundreds of freedom riders were jailed during that summer. In the fall of that year, a final ruling was issued that outlawed segregation in interstate travel.  The freedom riders risked a lot but they eventually won the battle. We all won.   There is so much more to say about the marches, boycotts, sit-ins and stand-ins but we’ve covered a lot in this podcast. We have to save something for the next podcast.   While the marches and protests were extremely effective, their ultimate goal was to change the laws that permitted unequal treatment and segregation. And the laws did change. Old laws were thrown out and new laws were created.  The Supreme Court was at the front of this legal change.  But groups like the NAACP and the ACLU were the real visionaries of this part of the movement.   Remember segregation was still the norm in much of the country. “No Coloreds” and “Whites Only” signs were legal and enforced.  Schools were segregated. Housing was segregated. Resources, jobs, funds, facilities were segregated.  Everything was separate yet it was not equal.   In my next podcast, we will how segregation was dismantled through the law and the important players in this critical step towards equality like the NAACP, the Supreme Court, and even the U.S. president or two.   I hope that you will join me for that incredibly important and (I promise!) interesting podcast.  The Civil Rights Movement was definitely an exciting time in US history.  It seems like the people at the time were either on their best game or at their most evil. We know how that story ends. Lots of great things happened for the country. But lots of good people also died. It showed that dreams really can come true.   Please remember to contact me at robinlofton.com. I want your comments, questions, and thoughts.  And you can also find those books that I mentioned at the online store. They are definitely worth reading, I promise!    See you soon at robinlofton.com where we are remembering history and we’re making it!        

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.' Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company's decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation' itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890's, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white' and ‘black' was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.' Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only' signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900's saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world's population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.’ Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company’s decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation’ itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890’s, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white’ and ‘black’ was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.’ Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only’ signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900’s saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world’s population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.’ Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company’s decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation’ itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890’s, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white’ and ‘black’ was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.’ Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only’ signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900’s saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world’s population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.’ Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company’s decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation’ itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890’s, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white’ and ‘black’ was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.’ Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only’ signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900’s saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world’s population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.’ Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company’s decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation’ itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890’s, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white’ and ‘black’ was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.’ Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only’ signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900’s saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world’s population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.’ Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company’s decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation’ itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890’s, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white’ and ‘black’ was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.’ Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only’ signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900’s saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world’s population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Please join Alfred & Karl as they discuss a variety of topics Friday evening.    Miley Cyrus Scandal Fast Food Strike Whites only church Church target gay ordinance Black celebrity atheists ...and more...   Please join them at 5PM PST/7PM CST/8PM EST.   You can speak with the hosts at 310-982-4273 and press 1.  You can also Skype into the show.

This week I give you some ideas on how to make money doing what you love.  Bones Hooks sings (by request) a funk classic, by Chaka Khan and Rufus.  Let me know how he did.  Black History Month highlights American patriot, Otis McDonald and how racist say that the gun argument is only for Whites Only.    "Illegitimi Non Carborundum"  Barbara Baird takes on the Tactical Barbie phrase.  Shouts and the final episode of Zombie Strike #120.   please leave a comment on kennblanchard.com or like me on Facebook.com/blackmanwithagun1 feel free to share this show.  cover of the book, zen of gun ownership  http://amzn.com/B0070ORWYQ

Wherein those damn Ross kids talk about swimming pools, elitism, and public safety. Suggested Talking Points: I’m not on the microphone. “Public Swimming Pool. Whites Only”. A long time ago, in a parking lot far, far away. Scent of a Woman With Gonorrhea. Muggers only want iPhones. Designer vaginas. Highway to Rapeton. Here, have these spiders. Runaway implant. Tebowing is illegal. Dance Floor Danger. The Science Zone: Birds in Danger.

I think this is really interesting. Among the thousands of iconic and easily recognizable photographs of segregated water fountains in the American South, you will almost never find one that features a black woman, a white woman or a white man drinking. They are nearly all of black men drinking. Why is that? In her fine and thoughtful book Signs of the Times: The Visual Politics of Jim Crow (University of California Press, 2010), Elizabeth Abel tells us why. Segregation, like many social phenomena, had a triple life. 1) It was a thing, part of an objective reality now past (one wants to cite Ranke here). 2) It was a thing seen, an object filtered through the subjective experience of viewers (one wants to cite Kant here). 3) And it was a thing shown, a sign made by one person to be communicated to others (one wants to cite Saussure here). We can see these three lives in the sources Abel examines: photographs of segregation signs: “Whites Only”, “No Negroes”, “Colored Entrance”, and so on. They simultaneously tell us about the way segregation actually worked (Ranke), the way participants observed it (Kant), and the way photographers tried to show it to their audiences (Saussure). Able analyses all three lives, but her focus–and the explanation for the black-man-at-a-water-fountain photographic cliché–is really to be found in her investigation of the third. The photographers, most of whom were white liberal northerners, framed the depictions of the signs so as to convince spectators that segregation was degrading to blacks. Thus they usually moved whites completely out of the frame. Moreover, they elected to focus attention on the subject who could be most humiliated because that subject had, relatively speaking, the most status. So black men (high status) were shown rather than black women (low status). This example is only one of Abel’s many fine readings of these photographs. There are many others. I encourage you to pick up the book and see for yourself. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I think this is really interesting. Among the thousands of iconic and easily recognizable photographs of segregated water fountains in the American South, you will almost never find one that features a black woman, a white woman or a white man drinking. They are nearly all of black men drinking. Why is that? In her fine and thoughtful book Signs of the Times: The Visual Politics of Jim Crow (University of California Press, 2010), Elizabeth Abel tells us why. Segregation, like many social phenomena, had a triple life. 1) It was a thing, part of an objective reality now past (one wants to cite Ranke here). 2) It was a thing seen, an object filtered through the subjective experience of viewers (one wants to cite Kant here). 3) And it was a thing shown, a sign made by one person to be communicated to others (one wants to cite Saussure here). We can see these three lives in the sources Abel examines: photographs of segregation signs: “Whites Only”, “No Negroes”, “Colored Entrance”, and so on. They simultaneously tell us about the way segregation actually worked (Ranke), the way participants observed it (Kant), and the way photographers tried to show it to their audiences (Saussure). Able analyses all three lives, but her focus–and the explanation for the black-man-at-a-water-fountain photographic cliché–is really to be found in her investigation of the third. The photographers, most of whom were white liberal northerners, framed the depictions of the signs so as to convince spectators that segregation was degrading to blacks. Thus they usually moved whites completely out of the frame. Moreover, they elected to focus attention on the subject who could be most humiliated because that subject had, relatively speaking, the most status. So black men (high status) were shown rather than black women (low status). This example is only one of Abel’s many fine readings of these photographs. There are many others. I encourage you to pick up the book and see for yourself. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I think this is really interesting. Among the thousands of iconic and easily recognizable photographs of segregated water fountains in the American South, you will almost never find one that features a black woman, a white woman or a white man drinking. They are nearly all of black men drinking. Why is that? In her fine and thoughtful book Signs of the Times: The Visual Politics of Jim Crow (University of California Press, 2010), Elizabeth Abel tells us why. Segregation, like many social phenomena, had a triple life. 1) It was a thing, part of an objective reality now past (one wants to cite Ranke here). 2) It was a thing seen, an object filtered through the subjective experience of viewers (one wants to cite Kant here). 3) And it was a thing shown, a sign made by one person to be communicated to others (one wants to cite Saussure here). We can see these three lives in the sources Abel examines: photographs of segregation signs: “Whites Only”, “No Negroes”, “Colored Entrance”, and so on. They simultaneously tell us about the way segregation actually worked (Ranke), the way participants observed it (Kant), and the way photographers tried to show it to their audiences (Saussure). Able analyses all three lives, but her focus–and the explanation for the black-man-at-a-water-fountain photographic cliché–is really to be found in her investigation of the third. The photographers, most of whom were white liberal northerners, framed the depictions of the signs so as to convince spectators that segregation was degrading to blacks. Thus they usually moved whites completely out of the frame. Moreover, they elected to focus attention on the subject who could be most humiliated because that subject had, relatively speaking, the most status. So black men (high status) were shown rather than black women (low status). This example is only one of Abel's many fine readings of these photographs. There are many others. I encourage you to pick up the book and see for yourself. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/african-american-studies

I think this is really interesting. Among the thousands of iconic and easily recognizable photographs of segregated water fountains in the American South, you will almost never find one that features a black woman, a white woman or a white man drinking. They are nearly all of black men drinking. Why is that? In her fine and thoughtful book Signs of the Times: The Visual Politics of Jim Crow (University of California Press, 2010), Elizabeth Abel tells us why. Segregation, like many social phenomena, had a triple life. 1) It was a thing, part of an objective reality now past (one wants to cite Ranke here). 2) It was a thing seen, an object filtered through the subjective experience of viewers (one wants to cite Kant here). 3) And it was a thing shown, a sign made by one person to be communicated to others (one wants to cite Saussure here). We can see these three lives in the sources Abel examines: photographs of segregation signs: “Whites Only”, “No Negroes”, “Colored Entrance”, and so on. They simultaneously tell us about the way segregation actually worked (Ranke), the way participants observed it (Kant), and the way photographers tried to show it to their audiences (Saussure). Able analyses all three lives, but her focus–and the explanation for the black-man-at-a-water-fountain photographic cliché–is really to be found in her investigation of the third. The photographers, most of whom were white liberal northerners, framed the depictions of the signs so as to convince spectators that segregation was degrading to blacks. Thus they usually moved whites completely out of the frame. Moreover, they elected to focus attention on the subject who could be most humiliated because that subject had, relatively speaking, the most status. So black men (high status) were shown rather than black women (low status). This example is only one of Abel’s many fine readings of these photographs. There are many others. I encourage you to pick up the book and see for yourself. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Nelson Mandelas kamp för frihet i motståndsrörelsen ANC var lång och dramatisk. Från den fredliga kampen på 40- och 50-talet, den väpnade grenen Umkhonto we Sizwes sabotage och bombdåd på 60-talet och de 27 åren i fängelse till frigivningen och att Mandela blev president 1994. ”Apartheid är ett i grunden ondskefullt system”  Olof Palme ”Apartheidpolitiken i Sydafrika är vidrigare än något annat” Ingvar Carlsson Apartheidregimen införde ett omfattande system av raslagar och målet var rasåtskillnad. De vita hade makten och friheten och de svarta var förtryckta. En svart fick inte ens gå in genom samma dörr som en vit eller sitta på samma parkbänk. Skyltarna där det stod Whites Only fanns överallt. Regimen hade en stark militärmakt och var en hård polisstat. Apartheidtiden kantades av massakrer, raskravaller, avrättningar och massdemonstrationer. Dokumentären handlar om Nelson Mandelas och motståndsrörelsen ANCs kamp mot apartheid som ledde till att Sydafrika blev demokratiskt. I dokumentären intervjuas bland andra Ahmed Kathrada, som suttit i fängelse med Mandela i 27 år och varit hans följeslagare i kampen sen 40-talet, Dave Steward, president de Klerks statssekreterare, Archie Whitehead, som blev ANC-aktivist på 70-talet, Auburn Daniels, aktivist på 80-talet och Ingvar Carlsson. Hör Bengt Therner rapportera direkt från frigivningen av Nelson Mandela 11 februari 1990. Producent: Daniel Värjö Sänds första gången: 1 augusti 2010