To Find A Happy Medium

     I hope at this point, I have been sufficiently supplying you with enough documents and sources to back up my statements concerning our situation.  And as I told you in the beginning, it would be hard for you to believe--maybe even strange--but there it is, in "Black and White" (just remember the message is in black--while the surface to make it manifest is in white).  This becomes the metaphor for us throughout life, doesn't it.  Between the extremes lies the means--doesn't it?  Opposites can bring out the best in one another, or drive each other up a wall--can't they?  I'm sure a past-time activity of many of these groups--after the "water-cooler game"--is "Blank people are something, aren't they?"  Many groups have their versions of this.  I'm sure Asians have their version of the game as well.  Cultural differences between nations makes it difficult to find a happy medium.

     The funny thing about cultural awareness, is it makes you aware of how others are cultivated.  Just like agriculture is the study of how plants are raised, anthropology is the study of how culture plays a part, in the raising of a people.  One of the things that is terribly obvious about the European is, he does not like to be involved in anything he doesn't have the dominant role in.  Just take America:  This is a multi-cultural society, but the dominant culture and the dominant rules are established by the descendants of the British--the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (this position is currently being challenged, however).  We learn this culture, abide by its' rules, and even consider its' aspirations (the American Dream for example) as a matter of survival--within the White man's society.  But the opposite is never true: The Rothschild and the De Beers did not become part of the African Societies they invaded. They merely learned enough to manipulate Black countries out of their rich mineral resources--as well as influence our homelands socially, politically and economically.

     A lot of the tribal wars were financed through the European interest in the diamond trade, but the European always played the role of the negotiating buyer (the dominant position).  Europeans are delighted when they are influencing our societies, but are quite upset when the other way is the case (such as Hip-Hop's cultural influence on the youth around the world).

     My reason for establishing this, is to lay bare our symbiotic relationship with American culture and society.  While it is obvious from American History, we were brought over to America to be used as a tool, or an agent of free labor, establishing the foundations of Western society in lieu of the working class  and  bourgeoisie Freemasons; who wrestled the colony from its predecessors who were British masons of noble birth: It was never an established consideration for Blacks by Whites, to have any other life for us--other than enslavement!  In the West Indies, slaves, or Blacks were simply worked to death by their English counterparts!  So while Blacks were used to establish a free nation for Whites, not enough of Whites considered our freedom--until we rallied for it.  For the most part today, a lot of us still live a form of indentured servitude (especially when we use credit cards)!  One of the main issues of this symbiotic relationship dysfunction is everything seems to be done on their terms--making the relationship more parasitical than mutual.  Like for example, while we learn the nuances of this society (language, etiquette, laws, customs) as a matter of survival, most Blacks never receive the type of employment, etc., that would make survival possible without assistance like credit cards, etc.  Yet the ones who employ us, get rich from our mass productions.  In a word, parasitical like a tape worm, flea, or a bat!

     My earlier documentations reveal that our cultural relationship with America was rocky from the start.  Blacks were considered by Whites to be less human, and more like the beast of the field.  This alone indicates our symbiotic relationship was far from beneficial to our prosperity as a people: Even when slavery was abolished, the government offered no assistance for us to get on our feet, by providing any form of repatriation or means of livelihood.  This is because they did not consider us with the same consideration they would have had for a White captive or refugee.  The newly freed Blacks had to go back to the same "disgruntled customer," who was salty about the "human product or tool" he/she had to relinquish, and ask him or her could we work for them for pay.  Imagine how humiliating that was--while this was in lieu of the land indentured servants got, or soldiers received in service for the country!  Our free labor built the wealthiness of this nation, while the nation did not even offer government employment, as a means of recompense.  Sharecropping was little more than working for the "company store" (an employment on the stipulation that everything you needed would come from the employer's general store or purchased and supplied to you at their price)--a.k.a., "soon as we see our pay, you take it (back)."  While in later days, "self help groups" like the Universal Negro Improvement Association (or U.N.I.A. founded by the Honorable Marcus Garvey), the former Nation Of Islam (established by the Honorable Elijah Muhammad), or the early inception of the Black Panther Party, were considered from the onset by the government as "domestic enemies," attacked constantly by the American press. 

     Meanwhile, Black people remain in America, to this day, as a group or nation of people without a separate governing body to negotiate its' terms for settlement in lieu of American institutionalized slavery.  We have tried to be a part of this society, but we were never treated equally.  We remain a group that has to get in, where we fit in: having no lobbyists--past its' state and local representatives, who often are "self-serving."  We do have our own customs, traditions, scholarly pursuits, and arts--often enriching the American landscape--many times, without owning our the means of production.  Although the independent recording industry has grown greatly in these later years, the major labels still provides a "company store" backdrop for our inspiring Black talent.  Creative Writing and the publications that accompanies it has grown as well--but just as with the record industry, it really depends where our heads are at:  Are we working towards autonomy or merely "selling our souls to the devil?"

     The relationship is vicarious and precarious at best.  We should not be even looking for another group to be looking out for the interests of Blacks through affirmative action and such.  When members of a group or nation has to be mandated, directed, or forced by law to behave or play fair--best believe that most of its society members won't.  The chronology of Germany reveals that Its' Jewish population never saw Nietzche, Nihilism and their effect on Nazism, or the people of Germany coming. Commensalism symbiont only works in animals and in personal heterosexual relationships.  That's too much trust when it comes to groups, different races and multi-cultural societies.

     When it comes to societies, communities, and nations, factions within each type must take its own measures to secure their own "self-interests" by supplying their own brand of diplomacy.  For some, that might be working on the damage and exercising damage control: For those within a larger society, it may be challenging the morals and ethics of that society--questioning its' sense of justice and equality, but media is very skillful at turning things around in favor of the majority.  In the past, Blacks best interests were never previously taken to heart by the government--unless civil unrest proceeded it.  Those who are the elite amongst the majority of that larger society, will ultimately be the ones who will allow the change--and that won't happen unless something disturbs their flow.  

     The way we were freed, was an afterthought that arose out of the Reconstruction period after the Civil War.  By the way, the Civil War was never fought over the issue of slavery, it was fought over unfair practices of the North in a majority rule Congress (North passed a lot of legislation and Tariff bills against the South's interests by way of having North or Yankee majority rule in Congress).  So after President Jefferson acquired new lands for the United States, in an acquisition called "The Louisiana Purchase," both the North and South scrambled to acquire the new states--in an effort to change the balance of power in Congress.  When the North acquired a state, it was called a free state and therefore no slave  labor could be performed there.  And when the South started a state, it became called a "Slave State--a state where slaveowners could utilize the slaves they had for construction and various other forms of labor in which they didn't have to pay laborers for. 

      You see, some of you might think that slaves only picked cotton.  But if you  know anything about Booker T. Washington, you would know this is not true.  At one point, a lot of the construction trade in the South was Black--so in order to have that, those slaves must have had those skills.  Anyway, if any of the newly formed states from the Louisiana Purchase were free states, the Southern Slaveowner could not use his free labor to build barns, make and fix cattle fences, do house repairs or dig wells and ditches.  So the state had to be a Slave State in order to have slaves Labor in them.   So this became the final straw for the South: they produced the raw product but the North had them pay higher tariffs, they were not privy to the markets the North had over in Europe.  The Mason/Dixon line or Free and Slave State line was constructed and this was the microcosm of the macrocosm of a divided nation.  The issues were economic: pay vs. free; exploitation of the South by the North or secession.      

      Now as Blacks living in America, we Blacks have a lot of work to do.  A lot of it has to do with a very real attitude change.  First on the list is the belief and respect for one another.  Pride in what we each have accomplished and what we can do with such accomplishments as a group of people.  Part of my reasons of raising your awareness on these issues is to get you to reconsider our current condition.  The other reason is to get our people devoted to the idea of doing for self.  We cannot afford NOT to develop past the state Black people find themselves in within American society.  We are like an accident waiting to happen.  They have already labeled our people Minority.  Our issues automatically become Minority issues, where the rest of the country is concerned.  We are like the cash cow who gets paid in pennies or the Goose that lays the golden eggs who gets fed chicken feed.  Our issues are much bigger than that for us--that's why they must be handled by us to get the proper consideration.

     I remember in the 1980s, when Louis Farrakhan stepped to the Johnson Company and other major Black businesses, in an attempt to produce a toothpaste that Blacks as a whole would buy.  That action was met with major resistance by other American businesses.  First, Farrakhan belonged to a group that was targeted by the nation as a domestic enemy.  Secondly, not all Blacks believe in Louis Farrakhan or his movement, much less belong to it.  This makes the public suspect of Farrakhan's group having ulterior motives.  This point is a very important issue.  Thirdly, it is very hard to get all American Blacks to agree on anything--but Farrakhan had a good idea--he just wasn't the man for the job. 

     In case you haven't noticed, we are the only captive people who have not only thoroughly identified to our captor's culture--but have allowed them to tell us that we need leaders (by way of media spin doctors) and who our leaders are. First of all, we don't have nor need leaders: the sixties proved that point.  Once Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Huey P Newton, Stokely Carmichael, Ron Karenga, and others were identified by J. Edgar Hoover, of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as leaders--the government labeled them as domestic enemies and began to dismantle their organizations.   We don't need leaders, we need leadership as a people.  This way the consciousness and sophistication can be recognize as the developing voice of the people expressing and developing their own self interests.   We have genius in all aspects of our cultural creation within America, representing different aspects of social, political, religious and economical thought.  We may not agree with any total ideology of any of these organizations, but their spokesperson may have some good individual suggestions for us as a people.  They all deserve a cautious, analyzing and watchful ear; one which can discern fiction from fact.  If what they are saying is true, we should adapt their thinking to our way of looking at things. After all, truth is truth no matter what; it may come from "the mouth of babes," as well as a bum on the streets.   If they have qualities which establish them as vanguards and pioneers--then we should follow their suggestions and poise, so that we can also learn to lead and govern ourselves.  That's one of the reasons why we read, to collect data and develop ourselves utilizing the contents.  I remember, in my more religious days, when the church minutes were read--how the announcer used to say after the reading of the minutes--"how one should govern themselves accordingly."  I think this is precisely how one, who is aware, should govern themselves: listen, discern, find out what's true and update and upgrade themselves accordingly.  Not to be single-minded free agents, but to form your own perspective and work alongside various persons with the similar ideologies and interests.

     

     I find it extremely ironic, that we live in a country where, by way of the people (or large fashions of its people), weeded Blacks out from the indentured servitude class and designated our people to be made to perform permanent menial labor for hundreds of years (310 formal years of slavery) with no pay--while institutionalizing this same process into its own nationalistic fabric by rules to regulate it:  then emancipate us without proper consideration of our condition--and punish most of our efforts to further our social conditions and interests by labeling our actions as domestic treats to the country.  Why that sounds racist--in and of--itself.  Acts which followed in American History such as the "Jim Crow laws," "grandfather clause" and "separate but equal"--taken out of their context and objectively viewed, would arguably be defined by the neutral arbitrator as acts of terrorism.  Yet, when our people attempted to address our own issues under the "separate but equal" context--such as Tulsa and Black Wall Street--the jealousy such accomplishments created caused many Whites to burn these successful Black businesses to the ground.  And when the sixties came around with its multi-pronged approach towards promoting Black interests--civil rights, human rights, militant, non-violent--the protest acts were initially viewed as domestic threats and handled very violently on a local level until the country was internationally embarrassed by the acts perpetrated upon Dr. Martin Luther King and his "Non-Violent Civil Rights Movement" (patterned after Ghandi).

   

     What this teaches me is, everything is not "Black and White."  Everything is not conspiracy, nor does every White see things the same way.  Most times, it is the policy of business, lobbyists and government that is not yielding to us as Black people.  Then there are other things that never occur, simply because it is not an experience of the people to whom you are relying on.  They simply have no experience in that department or it is just not their interest: Meaning it doesn't strike their fancy, nor does it concern them.  So if you had to rely on these people to support your interests, it would probably never get done.  Protest--in essence--is an attempt to get these parties interested by an "in your face" approach; sort of like being an irritant.  I think you must be careful with this approach because you might be labeled and then dealt with like a fly hovering while waiting for the windshield on the freeway or versing an army with a hand gun.

     Next on the list is to activate what you know as important and necessary for us as a group and our own basic units--whether that be family or those close affiliates.   I think the real power lies in our practices as single people who come together with others because of common interests.  This allows us to grow and develop into advocacy groups who get together primarily because we are advocated for the same common cause. Especially since we have more millionaires in the media, entertainment field--as well as individual Black businesses on the rise from different walks of life.  After all, that's what the "Lion's Club" or the "Kiwanis Club" is.  And no, you don't need to take on each other's mantle--just the things that make sense to do.  I just know that we, as a people, have to promote the interests that concerns Black people, if we are going to ever see these things realized--we should not look for it to happen by people who do not share the same perspective.  We have to make it happen; issue by issue--person by person. 

Peace & Blessings,

  



C. Be'erla Hai-roi Myers

Bootstrapping:

Survival Guide for Conscious People In An Unconscious Environment

 

Lesson One: Freeing One's Mind from Western Misconceptions

 

   The freeing of one's mind from Western misconceptions is done by word analysis of this English language we use.  What do I mean?  A great, beloved man by the name Ra Un Nefer Amen once said, 'You can find more religion in the words one uses, than any religion one claims to be.'  Inside the words a person uses, is a true account of their beliefs--not what they propose they are.  Many people are poor judges of their own character--because they often are not honest about their shortcomings or tendencies.  As well, no one carries out the rules of their religion to the letter, so all fall short of the glory attributed to the Creator (so it is said).  But within words are their meanings (denotations), and their implications (connotations), saying what they mean to say--while implying the things they don't.  As my brother Unikue says, "Let a person talk long enough, and they will tell on themselves every time [directly and indirectly]."

   And while on that subject, it makes no sense for anyone to proclaim their faith to another person, unless the person they are speaking to--is of that said religion, belief, or ideology.  This is simply because, though you claim your ideology with a perfect understanding in your mind--your proclamation is subject to what the person who hears it perceives, believes, understands or feels about your ideology-- not what you claim your ideology is!  This is very important for you to grasp.  If you could be a "fly on the wall," when this person talks to a third person concerning YOUR ideology, religion, culture, science, philosophy or belief--you would fully appreciate what I just shared with you.

   We'd do better with a "Subject by subject--Q and A," in regards to this stuff.    That way they'd know how you personally stand on current issues, directly from your own mouth. . . But even that isn't fool proof...  People seem to ad lib and generalize the statements made by others, when they recall those things in their mind.  That type of behavior is something you need to eliminate from your behavior, in order to be efficient at understanding others--you must keep in mind that this is the reason why others may not understand you.   I remember having the same "organized religion conversation" with my own mother--you know, how I lean towards science, facts and such--only to hear her tell a friend of hers that I was more like a "Christian Scientist"--despite my detailed description. . .  Oh, well. . .  That's what happens to you when you give them catchy phrases and titles (like I'm a Muslim, Buddhist, Yoruba, Akhan, Ashanti, Ausar-Auset, etc.)--you become subject to how much the person knows about such things--despite how you much attempt to explain such things.

     However, the reverse is true for a real leader.  You must have an accurate account of the playing field around you.  This means you must have awareness or have intimate knowledge of things.  Not having this (a true account of things) in the streets, will get you killed--for example.  You must remember, the most important part of knowing, is being able to predict events based upon having such knowledge.  Not knowing means--there are some things that you are not accounting for--while striving to get a clear mental picture of such things; which will be the understanding:  It also means there are some things, you are not taking into consideration, before making decisions and taking actions which will ultimately have tragic consequences.  Basing ones actions upon all which is known about something, minimizes errors and provides ways to assure more efficient means of handling things in the future.

     Science is based upon the known and a scientist is devoted to such knowledge--especially when putting their theories and hypotheses to the test.  And while putting ones theories to the test, let us not forget those who make decisions based upon how they feel; as opposed to what is best for all parties involved.  Or, for that matter, the people who won't do things because it doesn't feel comfortable.  These are not actions of true leaders.  True leaders are measured by the amount of successes they have in life and how efficient they are at living.   And those successes are based upon centering actions around concepts which one can't lose with--which is the known and truth.  Proven concepts that have yielded the same results same results time and time again.  Many times, you will be faced with decisions, in which the right answer will be miles away from how you feel--or even far away from what you feel comfortable with; yet you must stick to what you know will guarantee success, regardless.  This is why scientists study theorem and theories in respect to hypothesis.  There is always difficulties associated with starting anything for the first time: It may take some time for you to get your feelings in line with that which goes according to truth; but eventually the right amount of successes provide the necessary enthusiasm needed for such an alliance.  But until such times, you must learn how to persevere.   

    The same goes for the words you use.  You must weigh carefully what you say, before you say it.  Your words should accurately depict the message (or concept) you are striving to deliver.  If the words aren't clear to you, how can they be accurate for the person you are speaking to?  Lack of tact can be worse than a smack!  Not only that, it is quite possible that the associated meaning of the words you are using (it's denotations/ connotations) might be fooling you!  Do you really know what those words mean?  Do you know what those words imply?

   Sometimes the words themselves have definitions--the concepts in and of themselves are not real, nor do they contain concepts which are true!  Do you really know what you are saying, or are you sort of, kind of, sure of the definition?  If not, your words can subtly redefine you.  Just because a word is printed in a dictionary, does not make the concept behind those words true.  YOU CAN EASILY BE TRICKED BY YOUR OWN WORDS OR BY WHAT YOU WANT TO BELIEVE, INSTEAD OF HOW THINGS ARE!  While you are not in the process of making decisions, you should weigh your words by using your scruples, to determine whether the concepts behind those words represent a reality which are true.  After all, words are added to a dictionary (as opposed to a lexicon) simply through popular word usage, not through validity or veracity! 

   At this point, it makes more sense to listen more tentatively for evidence of the truth in what the other person is saying.  It makes little sense to defend the wrong or incorrect issue, just because it came from what you call YOU--although there are some that will.  These are the persons who have to be right.  Even a broken clock is right two times a day, but no one is infallible.  You just have to be swift enough to know when your sum total of collected information is misinformation.  Self deception is the worst deception of them all.   Critical analysis becomes better with practice.  Soon you will be able to spot deception simply by the choice of words or wrong usage of words.   Besides, no growth comes to anyone who cannot admit err.   A good artist (draughtsman) knows he will never become great, until he learns to use both sides of the pencil--without hesitation.

    While on the subject of interpretation, it is quite natural when attacked, to defend your position.  If your position is right, there is no harm in this.  Matter of fact, it can be quite educational for the other person to learn the truth this way.  However, there are times when this course of action should not be pursued.  Yes, there is a time when the defense should rest.  Desisting becomes the best action for a person, as soon as you discover the thing you thought was right might be wrong.

     First of all, how much sense does this make:  "I'm thinking about something. . ."  "What's that?"  "I'm thinking about thoughts?"

     Thinking about thoughts?  What happens after you have completed thinking about those thoughts--what is that called?  Thought?  I thought about those thoughts, now I am done thinking...really?  How can the verb "thought," and the noun "thought" be the same?  Those are two different parts of grammar, and therefore contradictory.  How can you describe the action or process through which you examine a thing (thought)--the same as the process to describe the object of contemplation (thought)?  A.K.A., I thought about thoughts.  This confusion in subject and verb agreement, filters down into a Western mind's way of considering and contemplating thoughts.  They are confused as to what, where, why, and how to consider thoughts.  In a Westerner's conscious realm, once he accepts a thought as being true, he defends it as if it were him--even though he will tell you that someone told him about it or suggested it to him!  The meaning behind this word is very confusing in the way the Western world presents it.

     If you are considering thoughts, then thought is an object or noun.  The next question is, "Is thought within me or is thought something that is suggested and judged by me?"  That's easy.  If something can be suggested to you, without the use of syringes and/or energy currents (barring the stimulation of your ear drums), then it is conceptual.  Thoughts are something you consider and respond to.  There are some thoughts which you might respond to in anger and others you might respond to in joy.  Notice when people get angry, their breathing becomes shortened (thus the reason behind counting to ten).  Everyone does not respond to the same thought in the same way, indicating that it is the way the thought is considered, and its' associations with other things previously considered, which determines the type of response.  And that the thought itself is a foreign concept which is brought in, to be considered.  Within India, there is a religious group of people called the Vendatins.  In the Vendatins practice, they employ Ayurveda (dietary law) and Pranayama, a practice which includes breathing techniques to strip the air of energy or prana and control thoughts coming in.  So I would surmise, that thoughts are taken in with the air you breath, since losing it makes one's vessel unconscious. . .

     So thoughts are objects of contemplation that don't originate within the being, but definitely associates with other considerations that being might have had.  If it becomes something our consciousness favors, it becomes attached to those previous considerations and experiences and becomes like triggered responses and condition reflexes.  This makes thoughts somewhat like words, in the sense that thoughts are suggestions without the ability to make itself manifest.  Man and woman are consciousness or awareness (or non-physical entities), dwelling within a form (human), which has the ability to manifest the ideas one seriously considers (a.k.a. the soul).  What we are talking about here, is a discipline to re-gain control of our soul, through our sphere of awareness.

   I had a person whom I considered like a blood-brother, who grew tired of working and sought to secure a way of getting paid without working, so he sought public assistance for the answer.  He then discovered, if he feigned mental illness, public assistance could keep him on the rolls longer than the traditional three months they keep males without children living with them on their rolls.  So he being a person who missed his calling for acting, studied the subject quite well before trying it out on the representative for the agency.  They then referred him to a doctor, whom he convinced as well.  Well, to make a long story short, he did not take the medication prescribed to him, but continued to beguile the agency and doctor.  After several months into years of this process, he began to show signs of his own dysfunction.  Now he is a recluse and we are trying to get him to come out of his house to do the simplest things-- like shop for food.  This shows you that, if you tell lies long enough, you might become deceived by them yourself.

    Often, if a person takes on a losing battle, it is because of something he cannot see-- due to obstacles in the way.  Many obstacles, unfortunately, are self-imposed.  Many times, the deception is the persons own ego or trying to save face (one's public image)-- which is ultimately futile-- or-- worst yet, it's because they don't want to face the consequences of what's true.  For a perfect illustration of this, watch the behavior of Henry VIII on any of the second season episodes of the Tudors.  But once you see that you might be wrong, your statements should now become questions aimed at an investigation to locate the error by proper education and the right course of action.  That is, of course, if you can be honest with your persons and not lie to your psyche. . . 

 Yes, this switch-up could be hardly perceived, if you ask the right sort of questions in the proper manner...  However, some might mistake it as the same argument--when it has become a reasonable person who has hearken to the warning and is now acquiring the proper knowledge within a debate format!  He or she could act like the person they are arguing with, change their ways with their line of reasoning--but that could have only happened if the person was receptive to it.  But it looks much neater. 

BACK AT HOME, WHERE WE LIVE 

  
    I have often found within the United States, that our woman are generally good at leading a home without the father being present.  They are good at shouldering the burden.  Making decisions without any help.  In general, they are good at summing up situations and giving advice, but not so good at taking it or following it.  Especially when that advice comes from a man-- any man!  Several women will tell men what it takes to be a man, but don't you dare even attempt to tell them what it takes to be a woman!  Many women believe that they are smarter than men (and they may be smarter than some), due to their ability to manipulate a man emotionally (particularly where passion is involved)-- charm and grace is what they call it.

   But those women who have a hard time sticking to principle, "bottom-line" or a Male's assessment, I surmise, is due to women having a hard time delineating between their feelings and themselves.  They carry us in their womb, sharing souls with us for a while, before the day of release comes about, and the cord is severed... but even then, some may have a hard time letting us loose.  With some, they want to exert control over you but are wary of you ever controlling them.  Therefore when a male speaks, his words are put on her psychoanalytical couch and are scanned for any surreptitious moves!   Even good relationships in America will not escape the artful, clandestine, cloak and dagger, camouflaged game staged and directed by Madame la femme.  One never knows what she is thinking (unless there are gains to be had in revealing them).

   It seems it is easier for women to be attached to their own thoughts and feelings more so than to hierarchically arrange them according to their priority and purpose without prejudice.  Both may be known by her, yet she often takes what feels right or her emotional attachment over what's best -- or to admit a man is right.  Many times, her priority is how she feels about the situation and not what should be done.

   We, who are raised mainly by women in America, adopt a lot of this behavior, when it comes down to letting go of bad habits and thoughts that we have become accustomed to.  This type of thinking becomes an obstacle -- when the necessary is not within the repertoire of things experienced, felt or desired by the thinker.  The truth of the matter is, if you can identify what is needed in the situation, you need to follow through with it--no matter how you feel because it is the solution.  Remember, insanity is doing the same things over and over, yet wanting different results than the behavior yields.

  A lot of woman are guarded; which is to be expected, since there is a lot of liability for women in society (especially where pregnancy is concerned).  But women, if you can give advice, you should be able to take advice as well!  We cannot do everything like we want or feel, sometimes it must be done for the greater good -- regardless or not if you are capable of charming the socks off of a person.  We must hear both sides and choose what's right for all involved.  Life is to balanced in that way, eventually a person gets tired of being manipulated and held hostage. 

   Today many women want things to go their way -- and get everything, but are not that receptive and willing to give; using charm and manipulation -- not in a way in which both may benefit (by showing proper consideration) but for personal satisfaction only.  They twist and distort to make things look in such ways as to get what they want or solicit for pity to bring about the desired affect.  This is definitely a Western way of spinning things to hide the fact that what is being sought after is a solo-effort for sole control over the family and relationship through charm and sex.

   When the media does this, it is called spin doctoring-- bent on providing imagery through words that subtly creates a misconception in the minds of the viewer.  In the eighties, one reporter saw a group of Black teenagers on the corners of an urban block, jiving, teasing, gambling and doing things that teenagers (of that time) do.  Obviously, he did not see it as so innocently because he described them as a "wolf pack."  Now when one thinks of wolves, we think of fierce, wild dog-like creatures that present danger to humans (implying the Black teenagers aren't human beings).  Mind you, gangs on most of the East Coast, ended by 1972 and unlike the Three Penny Opera, thieves in the states don't usually congregate in large groups...

   Next, other members of the press began using the same term, when two or more Black males were involved in a vicious act or crime.  Now, threat is added.  Before long, in my city, they attempted to enforce a curfew on Black teenagers in the inner city, which seemed to not get much opposition until the NAACP stepped in by objecting to the derogatory use of the term.  As you can see, many Blacks in more affluent areas probably didn't object because they are too busy being "brown" and running away from their own people, instead of creating opportunities in the areas they came from by addressing issues within those communities.  The image is designed to depict the worst and that (in and of itself) would stimulate people to think the worst-- especially if those people suffer from self-hatred.

   What all this means is, organized religion and Western ideology has put a spin on the natural order of things.  Traditional ways become pagan to the church.  "First world people" (first in existence) become "third world people".  People who are fighting to get lands back from colonial manipulation or occupation of their indigenous lands are called Terrorists instead of liberation armies.  Spinning it.  Spinning it.  Sexual rights are masqueraded as women's right by sexually ambiguous members on the equal rights board.  Women-at-large generally believe themselves to be mistakenly independent or totally in control of the household in the West.  Of course, this clashes with traditional societies and their ideology.  It also clashes with the church and family structure.  Little surprise that single households are on the rise as a result of this trend in Western society.  This trend might resemble patterns of the past, but the social position was different then and women's attitudes were much different.  You often hear women say openly or covertly, "I won't do what my mother did to maintain her household."  Mother then, had a better sense of the whole -- these women today are in large a solo act coveting their offspring as though they own the product.  Some feign being proud of being a single mother, rather than admit or attribute it to a faulty philosophy or bad attitude.  Western civilization is becoming more savage and viking-like (and generally speaking we are following right behind them).

   When we look up into the heavens, we see the sun and the moon, along with nine other planets or solar bodies--not to mention the stars of our solar system.  When we look at the atom, we see the nucleus and electrons making orbits around that nucleus.  We see Western men, we see the destruction of the nuclear family.  Things are out of order.  In nature all things are dual.  They are divine complements: not opposites.  In the Western world, complements are opposing because of the differences and polarizations are calling themselves a relationship -- using the complementary forces to produce progeny, while absconding the finished product.  And we are following behind them, even though we know we come from another heritage.

  Sex-change, in vitro fertilization, surrogate mothers -- is this what the Creator planned?  Or is it the work of mad scientists drunk with power playing God with the natural order of things.  When my mother and father split my universe (after years of struggle on her part), she and he remained very civil--yet she kept me around positive male figures.  In her own words, she claimed: " I can raise you up but I can't teach you to be a man.  Only a man can do that."  Somehow, I don't think today's women in Western society believe that.  Nor do I think many of today's women in Western society believe that there is no substitute for a positive male role model or father figure within the life of a daughter.  I guess the West is experimenting with nitroglycerin.  Unfortunately, we are forced to see how it turns out, if we keep living like them...

     Polarizations are extremes.  All traditional teachings by first world peoples teaches to seek complementary forces and finding balance by seeking the middle path.  They do not make accommodations for extreme behavior, so even if it appears amongst the wealthy, most ethnicity does not embrace it.  For a liberated mind, these are things that will have to be re-adjusted for they do not fit within our original framework.  All so-called African Societies are Kabala based.  Current World History courses teach that life started in East Africa and extended outward into the Arabian Peninsula.  So Hebrew, Khammau, and Arab ancestry is Kabala based as well (as a matter of fact most people commonly mistake Kabala as a Hebrew invention).  Mesopotamia (located on the Arabian peninsula) is claimed to be the cradle of civilization by Western scholars and World Historians as well.  The Hebraic Tongue Restored  by Fabre D' Olivet and Anacalyptus by Godfrey Higgins both state that the Hebrew and Arab are two branches of the same family tree and if since the Bible is derived from the Hebrew Scriptures, it cannot be in favor of what the Western man embraces.

     We start taking hold of ourselves by analyzing us (and others) as a collective and denying access to any thoughts or ideas which are not in keeping with that which we know as appropriate.  Weighing and judging learnt Western tradition, should be handled in the same manner as one should weigh their words.  As one judges whether the terms are real or appropriate for the circumstance (concerning the words which are used), one should weigh and judge the ways of Western society in which we live.

     For example, in a lot of neighborhoods, like Frankford, it has been a long term tradition to loop your old sneakers together and throw them up onto the telephone line outside between the poles--to hang for posterity.  Weighing this tradition critically, in the past those sneakers in the past had holes in them and were not suitable for use any longer.  Today's sneakers are just worn in on the surface, and replaced by a new pair as soon as they stop looking new or fresh.  The appropriate thing for today's generation would be to only have completely worn out sneakers on those telephone lines, and the other sneaks should be donated for the less fortunate.  Following a pattern like this will help us redefine ourselves within this country--in a more appropriate manner.
     
     Public media, films, magazines and news from the West, needs to constantly be carefully scrutinized, for their content, usage, terms and meanings of those words--to discern whether or not those ways should be incorporated into your living.  Or in the case of discovered indoctrination, whether or not it should be continued.  After all, long before you were aware of it, you were being conditioned into the mores and values of this society, while you were young and uncritical.  Now is the time to gain back the real you, through rigorous action.  Pledge to your Self: "From now on, I will know why my person does things, and the things it does will be in keeping with the things I know is right and exact (approved and appropriate)."
Thank you for considering my words.  Hope this will lead you to your liberation.  The choice is yours.


Peace and Blessings,

C. Be'erla Hai-roi Myers