Taking the Amtrak Between NY and Washington Washington Reveals America’s Crumbling Infrastructure and Forgotten Neigborhoods
Dr Mark Naison
Fordham University
Early this week, I took Amtrak down to Washington to interview Frank Synder, Pensylvania State director of the AFL-CIO about labor’s campaign for Obama in Pennylvania in the 2008 Presidential election, which was one of the most important, grass roots efforts to confront the “race” issue head on in modern American history
Normally when taking Amtrak, I sleep or read, but because of the terrible crash on the Washington Metro late Monday afternoon, which=2 0took place when I was on the very same Metro Line only four stops away, I was too rattled to do either, so I found myself looking out the window the entire ride back to New York 0A
What I saw filled me with sadness.
From Baltimore right through Newark, I saw the remnants of of America’s crumbling industrial infrastructure revealed right before my eyes, along with the damage done to once proud working class neighborhoods in Baltimore, Wilmington, Philadelphia, Camden, Trenton, Elizabeth and Newark
It was not just the hundreds abandoned factories I saw along the route, some of them a quarter of a mile wide, their windows broken or boarded up, their walls covered with graffiti, their yards filled with garbage and rusting trucks, it was the physical conditions, and atmosphere of the neighborhoods adjoining the factory that was equally depressing
Here, especially in Baltimore, Wilmington and North Philadelphia, I passed block after block of two story attached row houses with porches, a distinctive form of housing built for the local working class when these three cities buzzed with industry and enterprise. Once, these modest houses were regularly painted and spotlessly clean, the sidewalks in front of them swept daily by working class men and women proud that a job in a nearby factory allowed them to purchase their own home. Now, what houses were still left, many of them boarded up, or in advanced states of disrepair, stood on blocks where weed filled vacant lots took up as much place as the homes. These neighborhoods once had vital commercial districts, but the few stores left, their entrances protected by gates and their walls covered with graffiti, looked like they were under siege. At the speed we were traveling,20which was 20-30 miles an hour ( there were stations in each of these cities and the train would slow down when approaching) I could only get a glimpse of the people on the streets, on porches or in backyards, but the one thing that leaped out at me was that the vast majority of the m were Black and Brown. These once pr oud working class communities, deprived of unionized, living wage jobs in steel mills, shipyards, metal fabricating works, chemical and electrical plants and truck and railroad depots, had become holding pens for poor people, many of them trapped in intergenerational poverty, whose labor was no longer valued or needed in a post industrial American economy.
Significantly, the one institution along the tracks that I didn’t see boarded up were the prisons. I passed at least six prison structures along the Amtrak route, easily identified by the windowless walls, their turret like towers ( if they were more than 40 years old) and the barbed wire fencing &nb sp;that surrounded them. I had seen this before in declining industrial cities. When I visited Youngstaown Ohio ten years ago, where a five mile stretch along the Mongahela River was filled with the remnants of once bustling steel mills, the only new bu ilding in the city was a spanking new federal prison.
But if anything, the sight of the prisons along the Amtrak route depressed me even more. Once scene in particular reminded me of the profound inequalities, both racial and economic, that deform the American social structure. Just before the train pulled into the station at Newark airport, when it was moving ten miles an hour, I got a glimpse of what had to be prison yard on the West side of the tracks. There I saw a group of forty or fifty black men, most of them in their twenties, playing basketball, or standing around talking, while in a corner two very tough looking fort y year old white men with cut off sleeves stood observing. This was not a scene from OZ, it was real life, but I doubt if anyone else on the train noticed. What made it all the more eerie was that the people getting off and boarding the train at Newark Airport, were predominantly white and middle class. Here you had two different Americas, side by side, as separate and uneq ual as anything we had during the days=2 0of legal segregation, only race alone was not the criteria. Now it was race AND class that separated those left in decaying stretches of industrial towns and cities, from those living in middle class suburbs and upscale and gentrifying urban neighborhoods
Even before this current economic crises, significant portions of the American population were living in Depression like conditions. Bruce Springsteen, who knows the world along Amtrak very well, tried to remind us of the tragic consequences of deindustrialization in songs like “Born In the USA,” but how many of us heard his message?
Down in the shadow of the penitentiary
Out by the gas fires of the refinery
I’m ten years burning down the road
Nowhere to run ain’t got nowhere to go
Forty years of union busting, factory closing and prison construction have taken a terrible toll, not only on the lives of tens of millions of people, but on American democracy as a political ideal and a lived reality. Unless we do something to empower the people an d revive the communities that adjoin Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor- and places like it all around the nation-, large portions of the American population will remain locked out of the American Dream.
Mark Naison
June 24, 2009
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Don’t Be Disappointed in President Obama, Be Disappointed in Yourselves
Don’t Be Disappointed in President Obama, Be Disappointed in Yourselves
Response to Former Student Distressed by the Slow Pace of Change in the New
Administration.
Dr Mark Naison
Fordham University
Yesterday, one of my favorite former students wrote an email to my alumni listserv expressing his extreme disappointment with Barack Obama’s presidency and arguing that if one looked at how the administration has dealt with three key issues- health care, the environment, and foreign policy- Barack Obama was indistinguishable from Hilary Clinton and perilously close to becoming “George Bush Lite.”
As a concerned citizen who has followed the Obama administration’s economic policies very closely, and as an historian who has spent many years studying the Great Depression and the New Deal, I would like to respectfully dissent from this assessment of the Obama presidency
In my judgment, Barack Obama did not ascend to the presidency with a clear mandate to overhaul the nation’s health care system, radically revise its environmental policies and steer a dramatic new course in foreign policy. The Republicans and Independents who rallied to Obama during the last two months of the campaign did so because they wanted a president to prevent the nation from falling into a catastrophic Depression and to make sure that victims of the current economic crisis receive government aid
In the first six months of his presidency, that is exactly what Barack Obama has done. He has prevented the banking system from collapsing and restored commercial lending, taken emergency measures to rescue the automobile industry, and funneled hundreds of billions of dollars to state and local governments to allow them to continue functioning without massive layoffs and cuts in services. The Stimulus Package alone has staved off incalculable hardship. According to my wife, an elementary school principal in New York City, hundreds of thousands of dollars of stimulus money have flowed into every public school in New York City, preventing what otherwise would have been massive teacher layoffs and dramatic increases in class size. Health care institutions throughout the nation have also been able to avoid dramatic reductions in staffing because of an infusion of federal funds. When all is said and done, the Obama administration can be credit with helping save a capitalist system gone mad with its own excesses, while saving millions of public and private sector jobs that might have disappeared if Bush Administration economic policies had continued
As for health care, environment and foreign policy, where are the grass roots social movements marching in the streets, and besieging congress, to demand progressive change in those areas?
During the 1930’s Franklin Roosevelt was elected to office in amidst massive political unrest. In every part of the country, there were strikes, hunger marches, eviction riots, and armed resistance to farm seizures by banks. Some portions of this unrest, particularly hunger marches and eviction protests, eased after the emergency measures of the “First Hundred Days,” but some portions of it, especially labor organizing, actually escalated in intensity right up through the 1936 Presidential election, putting pressure on Roosevelt to make far more dramatic changes in economic policy than he had originally intended to do. It was continuous “pressure from below” that led to the passage of the Social Security Act, the Wagner Labor Relations Act, and other measures which created a safety net for America’s workers and retirees.
If we want the Obama administration to implement radical changes in America’s health care system and environmental policies, to begin dismantling the prison industrial complex and to reduce the size of the American military and its role in shaping foreign policy, than we will have to fight for those policies in the streets and the halls of Congress, day in day out, for many, many years.
Changes of that magnitude cannot be implemented by a sitting president without popular movements fighting the entrenched interests that support current policies
It’s time to take the scrutiny off the President and put it on ourselves.
If key policy areas remain immune to reform, it is our own inaction, not the President’s, that is largely to blame.
Mark Naison
June 20, 2009
Response to Former Student Distressed by the Slow Pace of Change in the New
Administration.
Yesterday, one of my favorite former students wrote an email to my alumni listserv expressing his extreme disappointment with Barack Obama’s presidency and arguing that if one looked at how the administration has dealt with three key issues- health care, the environment, and foreign policy- Barack Obama was indistinguishable from Hilary Clinton and perilously close to becoming “George Bush Lite.”
As a concerned citizen who has followed the Obama administration’s economic policies very closely, and as an historian who has spent many years studying the Great Depression and the New Deal, I would like to respectfully dissent from this assessment of the Obama presidency
In my judgment, Barack Obama did not ascend to the presidency with a clear mandate to overhaul the nation’s health care system, radically revise its environmental policies and steer a dramatic new course in foreign policy. The Republicans and Independents who rallied to Obama during the last two months of the campaign did so because they wanted a president to prevent the nation from falling into a catastrophic Depression and to make sure that victims of the current economic crisis receive government aid
In the first six months of his presidency, that is exactly what Barack Obama has done. He has prevented the banking system from collapsing and restored commercial lending, taken emergency measures to rescue the automobile industry, and funneled hundreds of billions of dollars to state and local governments to allow them to continue functioning without massive layoffs and cuts in services. The Stimulus Package alone has staved off incalculable hardship. According to my wife, an elementary school principal in New York City, hundreds of thousands of dollars of stimulus money have flowed into every public school in New York City, preventing what otherwise would have been massive teacher layoffs and dramatic increases in class size. Health care institutions throughout the nation have also been able to avoid dramatic reductions in staffing because of an infusion of federal funds. When all is said and done, the Obama administration can be credit with helping save a capitalist system gone mad with its own excesses, while saving millions of public and private sector jobs that might have disappeared if Bush Administration economic policies had continued
As for health care, environment and foreign policy, where are the grass roots social movements marching in the streets, and besieging congress, to demand progressive change in those areas?
During the 1930’s Franklin Roosevelt was elected to office in amidst massive political unrest. In every part of the country, there were strikes, hunger marches, eviction riots, and armed resistance to farm seizures by banks. Some portions of this unrest, particularly hunger marches and eviction protests, eased after the emergency measures of the “First Hundred Days,” but some portions of it, especially labor organizing, actually escalated in intensity right up through the 1936 Presidential election, putting pressure on Roosevelt to make far more dramatic changes in economic policy than he had originally intended to do. It was continuous “pressure from below” that led to the passage of the Social Security Act, the Wagner Labor Relations Act, and other measures which created a safety net for America’s workers and retirees.
If we want the Obama administration to implement radical changes in America’s health care system and environmental policies, to begin dismantling the prison industrial complex and to reduce the size of the American military and its role in shaping foreign policy, than we will have to fight for those policies in the streets and the halls of Congress, day in day out, for many, many years.
Changes of that magnitude cannot be implemented by a sitting president without popular movements fighting the entrenched interests that support current policies
It’s time to take the scrutiny off the President and put it on ourselves.
If key policy areas remain immune to reform, it is our own inaction, not the President’s, that is largely to blame.
Mark Naison
June 20, 2009
Response to Former Student Distressed by the Slow Pace of Change in the New
Administration.
Dr Mark Naison
Fordham University
Yesterday, one of my favorite former students wrote an email to my alumni listserv expressing his extreme disappointment with Barack Obama’s presidency and arguing that if one looked at how the administration has dealt with three key issues- health care, the environment, and foreign policy- Barack Obama was indistinguishable from Hilary Clinton and perilously close to becoming “George Bush Lite.”
As a concerned citizen who has followed the Obama administration’s economic policies very closely, and as an historian who has spent many years studying the Great Depression and the New Deal, I would like to respectfully dissent from this assessment of the Obama presidency
In my judgment, Barack Obama did not ascend to the presidency with a clear mandate to overhaul the nation’s health care system, radically revise its environmental policies and steer a dramatic new course in foreign policy. The Republicans and Independents who rallied to Obama during the last two months of the campaign did so because they wanted a president to prevent the nation from falling into a catastrophic Depression and to make sure that victims of the current economic crisis receive government aid
In the first six months of his presidency, that is exactly what Barack Obama has done. He has prevented the banking system from collapsing and restored commercial lending, taken emergency measures to rescue the automobile industry, and funneled hundreds of billions of dollars to state and local governments to allow them to continue functioning without massive layoffs and cuts in services. The Stimulus Package alone has staved off incalculable hardship. According to my wife, an elementary school principal in New York City, hundreds of thousands of dollars of stimulus money have flowed into every public school in New York City, preventing what otherwise would have been massive teacher layoffs and dramatic increases in class size. Health care institutions throughout the nation have also been able to avoid dramatic reductions in staffing because of an infusion of federal funds. When all is said and done, the Obama administration can be credit with helping save a capitalist system gone mad with its own excesses, while saving millions of public and private sector jobs that might have disappeared if Bush Administration economic policies had continued
As for health care, environment and foreign policy, where are the grass roots social movements marching in the streets, and besieging congress, to demand progressive change in those areas?
During the 1930’s Franklin Roosevelt was elected to office in amidst massive political unrest. In every part of the country, there were strikes, hunger marches, eviction riots, and armed resistance to farm seizures by banks. Some portions of this unrest, particularly hunger marches and eviction protests, eased after the emergency measures of the “First Hundred Days,” but some portions of it, especially labor organizing, actually escalated in intensity right up through the 1936 Presidential election, putting pressure on Roosevelt to make far more dramatic changes in economic policy than he had originally intended to do. It was continuous “pressure from below” that led to the passage of the Social Security Act, the Wagner Labor Relations Act, and other measures which created a safety net for America’s workers and retirees.
If we want the Obama administration to implement radical changes in America’s health care system and environmental policies, to begin dismantling the prison industrial complex and to reduce the size of the American military and its role in shaping foreign policy, than we will have to fight for those policies in the streets and the halls of Congress, day in day out, for many, many years.
Changes of that magnitude cannot be implemented by a sitting president without popular movements fighting the entrenched interests that support current policies
It’s time to take the scrutiny off the President and put it on ourselves.
If key policy areas remain immune to reform, it is our own inaction, not the President’s, that is largely to blame.
Mark Naison
June 20, 2009
Response to Former Student Distressed by the Slow Pace of Change in the New
Administration.
Yesterday, one of my favorite former students wrote an email to my alumni listserv expressing his extreme disappointment with Barack Obama’s presidency and arguing that if one looked at how the administration has dealt with three key issues- health care, the environment, and foreign policy- Barack Obama was indistinguishable from Hilary Clinton and perilously close to becoming “George Bush Lite.”
As a concerned citizen who has followed the Obama administration’s economic policies very closely, and as an historian who has spent many years studying the Great Depression and the New Deal, I would like to respectfully dissent from this assessment of the Obama presidency
In my judgment, Barack Obama did not ascend to the presidency with a clear mandate to overhaul the nation’s health care system, radically revise its environmental policies and steer a dramatic new course in foreign policy. The Republicans and Independents who rallied to Obama during the last two months of the campaign did so because they wanted a president to prevent the nation from falling into a catastrophic Depression and to make sure that victims of the current economic crisis receive government aid
In the first six months of his presidency, that is exactly what Barack Obama has done. He has prevented the banking system from collapsing and restored commercial lending, taken emergency measures to rescue the automobile industry, and funneled hundreds of billions of dollars to state and local governments to allow them to continue functioning without massive layoffs and cuts in services. The Stimulus Package alone has staved off incalculable hardship. According to my wife, an elementary school principal in New York City, hundreds of thousands of dollars of stimulus money have flowed into every public school in New York City, preventing what otherwise would have been massive teacher layoffs and dramatic increases in class size. Health care institutions throughout the nation have also been able to avoid dramatic reductions in staffing because of an infusion of federal funds. When all is said and done, the Obama administration can be credit with helping save a capitalist system gone mad with its own excesses, while saving millions of public and private sector jobs that might have disappeared if Bush Administration economic policies had continued
As for health care, environment and foreign policy, where are the grass roots social movements marching in the streets, and besieging congress, to demand progressive change in those areas?
During the 1930’s Franklin Roosevelt was elected to office in amidst massive political unrest. In every part of the country, there were strikes, hunger marches, eviction riots, and armed resistance to farm seizures by banks. Some portions of this unrest, particularly hunger marches and eviction protests, eased after the emergency measures of the “First Hundred Days,” but some portions of it, especially labor organizing, actually escalated in intensity right up through the 1936 Presidential election, putting pressure on Roosevelt to make far more dramatic changes in economic policy than he had originally intended to do. It was continuous “pressure from below” that led to the passage of the Social Security Act, the Wagner Labor Relations Act, and other measures which created a safety net for America’s workers and retirees.
If we want the Obama administration to implement radical changes in America’s health care system and environmental policies, to begin dismantling the prison industrial complex and to reduce the size of the American military and its role in shaping foreign policy, than we will have to fight for those policies in the streets and the halls of Congress, day in day out, for many, many years.
Changes of that magnitude cannot be implemented by a sitting president without popular movements fighting the entrenched interests that support current policies
It’s time to take the scrutiny off the President and put it on ourselves.
If key policy areas remain immune to reform, it is our own inaction, not the President’s, that is largely to blame.
Mark Naison
June 20, 2009
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Building New Housing Without Youth Centers and Stores Doesn’t Create Community- Reflections on a Walking Tour of Morriansania
Building New Housing Without Youth Centers and Stores Doesn’t Create Community- Reflections on a Walking Tour of Morriansania
Dr Mark Naison
Fordham University
Last Wednesday, I led a walking tour of Morrisania for 25 interns from a community legal services organizations called “The Bronx Defenders.” The group, mostly consisting of law students, was young, sharp, and keenly observant. The tour is one of my favorite events, as it gives me a chance to talk about Morrisania’s unique history as one of the nation’s most racially and cultural integrated communities in the US from the late 1930’s through the early 1960’s and to boast of its unmatched legacy of musical creativity The tour also gives me a chance to talk about the arson and abandonment cycle which hit the neighborhood in the late sixties and lasted through the late seventies, leading to a loss of nearly half the neighborhoods housing stock, and nearly sixty percent of its population, between 1970 and `1980
Despite the tragic events the tour covers, it usually ends on a somewhat upbeat note because of the wave of new housing construction taking place in Morrisania. Each time I do the tour, it seems that another vacant lot is being filled with two or three family townhouses, or six to eight story apartment buildings, to the point where there are almost no vacant lots left. Even during the current economic crisis, the rebuilding of Morriansania’s housing stock has continued unabated, with new construction being initiated someplace in the neighborhood almost weekly.
But though this wave of new construction is certainly gratifying, especially to someone who lived in the neighborhood, or who visited it regularly during those terrifying years when huge stretches of Morrisania and nearby Hunts Point offered a depressing vista of garbage filled lots, abandoned cars, and wild dogs roaming the streets, there were some critical things missing amidst what some people would consider a miracle of urban revitalization
One of these is youth centers. During our three mile walk through Morrisania, going through the neighborhoods major thoroughfares ( Stebbins Ave, Prospect Ave, Boston Road, 163rd Street) as well as many side streets, through we saw what had to be several thousand new units of affordable housing , but not one new gymnasium, Boys and Girls Club, PAL Center, or YM/ YWCA
To many members of my tour group, this seemed like an example of incredibly poor planning. Bringing thousands of new residents into a neighborhood, many of whom are young immigrant families with children, without making any provision for indoor recreation space, or organized sports leagues, for children and adolescents was a virtual invitation to these youngsters to spend their leisure hours in the street. In a community which already had a serious gang problem and a thriving drug economy, this was a prescription for disaster. Several people we met in the neighborhood, especially longtime Bronx youth worker and neighborhood advocate Hetty Fox, said that the absence of constructive youth activities had created a vicious cycle of drug related violence, and brutal, often indiscriminate police harassment that made life in Morrisania extremely dangerous and stressful for neighborhood adolescents, especially adolescent males. She spoke of the “genius of youth” being wasted in her community and called the destruction of human potential taking place in the Bronx as just as bad, if not worse, as the destruction of the borough’s housing stock that took place in the 1970’s.
Shaken by Hetty Fox’s comments, our group looked at all the newly built housing we passed, with more cynical eyes, and noticed something else missing- stores and commercial space. Frankly, this was something I had never noticed before on my walks through the neighborhood, but the group’s observation was right on point. There large portions of Morrisania, most notably along Stebbins Ave ( now Rev James Polite Place) where scores of new multiple dwellings had been erected without so much as a single grocery store being opened to serve what were probably thousands of new residents. The same was true of new housing built along Home Street, Union Avenue, and other secondary thoroughfares. Not only did such an absence of commercial development make shopping more time consuming and inconvenient for Morrisania residents, it missed an opportunity to spur the creation of small businesses, which among other things, promote sociability among old and new residents, provide an outlet for ethnic enterprise and create legal job opportunities for neighborhood youth.
By the time we had finished our Morrisania tour- at a great neighborhood small business called Johnson’s BBQ which had been in the same location for over fifty years- we were all feeling that a huge opportunity had been missed to recreate the nurturing atmosphere and community spirit that Morrisania had once possessed during the 1940’s, 1950’s and 1960’s. In their rush to fill the city’s desperate need for affordable housing, city officials and local community groups had neglected to provide room in their plans for two critical components of a healthy city neighborhood- youth programs and small businesses. The result was a neighborhood which, on the surface looked healthy and dynamic, but was plagued with drug problems, police problems and a sense of trepidation among many residents about what would happen to their children when they reached adolescence.
It’s time we start doing the kind of wholistic planning that my good friend Leroi Archible ( known throughout the Bronx as “Street Man”) has been recommending for years, and start building youth centers, ballfields and strip malls in every portion of the Bronx marked off for “redevelopment.” Throwing up housing without other services and amenities is a poor prescription for creating community
Mark Naison
June 16, 2009
Dr Mark Naison
Fordham University
Last Wednesday, I led a walking tour of Morrisania for 25 interns from a community legal services organizations called “The Bronx Defenders.” The group, mostly consisting of law students, was young, sharp, and keenly observant. The tour is one of my favorite events, as it gives me a chance to talk about Morrisania’s unique history as one of the nation’s most racially and cultural integrated communities in the US from the late 1930’s through the early 1960’s and to boast of its unmatched legacy of musical creativity The tour also gives me a chance to talk about the arson and abandonment cycle which hit the neighborhood in the late sixties and lasted through the late seventies, leading to a loss of nearly half the neighborhoods housing stock, and nearly sixty percent of its population, between 1970 and `1980
Despite the tragic events the tour covers, it usually ends on a somewhat upbeat note because of the wave of new housing construction taking place in Morrisania. Each time I do the tour, it seems that another vacant lot is being filled with two or three family townhouses, or six to eight story apartment buildings, to the point where there are almost no vacant lots left. Even during the current economic crisis, the rebuilding of Morriansania’s housing stock has continued unabated, with new construction being initiated someplace in the neighborhood almost weekly.
But though this wave of new construction is certainly gratifying, especially to someone who lived in the neighborhood, or who visited it regularly during those terrifying years when huge stretches of Morrisania and nearby Hunts Point offered a depressing vista of garbage filled lots, abandoned cars, and wild dogs roaming the streets, there were some critical things missing amidst what some people would consider a miracle of urban revitalization
One of these is youth centers. During our three mile walk through Morrisania, going through the neighborhoods major thoroughfares ( Stebbins Ave, Prospect Ave, Boston Road, 163rd Street) as well as many side streets, through we saw what had to be several thousand new units of affordable housing , but not one new gymnasium, Boys and Girls Club, PAL Center, or YM/ YWCA
To many members of my tour group, this seemed like an example of incredibly poor planning. Bringing thousands of new residents into a neighborhood, many of whom are young immigrant families with children, without making any provision for indoor recreation space, or organized sports leagues, for children and adolescents was a virtual invitation to these youngsters to spend their leisure hours in the street. In a community which already had a serious gang problem and a thriving drug economy, this was a prescription for disaster. Several people we met in the neighborhood, especially longtime Bronx youth worker and neighborhood advocate Hetty Fox, said that the absence of constructive youth activities had created a vicious cycle of drug related violence, and brutal, often indiscriminate police harassment that made life in Morrisania extremely dangerous and stressful for neighborhood adolescents, especially adolescent males. She spoke of the “genius of youth” being wasted in her community and called the destruction of human potential taking place in the Bronx as just as bad, if not worse, as the destruction of the borough’s housing stock that took place in the 1970’s.
Shaken by Hetty Fox’s comments, our group looked at all the newly built housing we passed, with more cynical eyes, and noticed something else missing- stores and commercial space. Frankly, this was something I had never noticed before on my walks through the neighborhood, but the group’s observation was right on point. There large portions of Morrisania, most notably along Stebbins Ave ( now Rev James Polite Place) where scores of new multiple dwellings had been erected without so much as a single grocery store being opened to serve what were probably thousands of new residents. The same was true of new housing built along Home Street, Union Avenue, and other secondary thoroughfares. Not only did such an absence of commercial development make shopping more time consuming and inconvenient for Morrisania residents, it missed an opportunity to spur the creation of small businesses, which among other things, promote sociability among old and new residents, provide an outlet for ethnic enterprise and create legal job opportunities for neighborhood youth.
By the time we had finished our Morrisania tour- at a great neighborhood small business called Johnson’s BBQ which had been in the same location for over fifty years- we were all feeling that a huge opportunity had been missed to recreate the nurturing atmosphere and community spirit that Morrisania had once possessed during the 1940’s, 1950’s and 1960’s. In their rush to fill the city’s desperate need for affordable housing, city officials and local community groups had neglected to provide room in their plans for two critical components of a healthy city neighborhood- youth programs and small businesses. The result was a neighborhood which, on the surface looked healthy and dynamic, but was plagued with drug problems, police problems and a sense of trepidation among many residents about what would happen to their children when they reached adolescence.
It’s time we start doing the kind of wholistic planning that my good friend Leroi Archible ( known throughout the Bronx as “Street Man”) has been recommending for years, and start building youth centers, ballfields and strip malls in every portion of the Bronx marked off for “redevelopment.” Throwing up housing without other services and amenities is a poor prescription for creating community
Mark Naison
June 16, 2009
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Getting Real About White Men
As a white man, I would like to share my thoughts about those white men feel threatened by Sonia Sotomayor's appointment to the US Supreme Court. Like Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich and many conservative commentators, I could easily been affronted when I read Judge Sotomayor's comment that a Latina woman might bring a perspective to the judiciary that most white men would be unable to provide.
But though I have been a white male a long time, I have been lucky enough to spend a great deal of time in places where people like me are rarely found, as well as in places where ONLY people like me are present, and the contrast between those places is worth pointing out
. To help put the position of white men in American society in perspective, especially relative to Latina women and other women of color, I am going to identify a number of places where white men are the overwhelmingly dominant group, and then indicated some spaces where white men are an in a tiny minority. You can then draw your own conclusions, after comparing the two lists, about whether white man are in imminent danger of being unfairly displaced from position of status and influence
Places I Have Been, or Visited, Where White Men Predominate and Women of Color Rarely Appear
The United States Senate
The Trading Floor of the US Stock Exchange
The Partners Room in Major New York Law Firms
Peter Lugar's Steakhouse and Il Molino Restaurant
The Bar at Most New York Area Golf Clubs and Country Clubs
The New York Athletic Club
The Press Box at Yankee Stadium
Any Tennis Club in the Hamptons
Ski Resorts in Aspen and Vail
Breezy Point aka "The Irish Riviera" ( in the Rockaways)
Places I Have Been Where White Men ( Present Company Excluded) Rarely Appear and Women of Color are Highly Visible
The Hub ( A Major Shopping District in the South Bronx)
Fulton Mall
Hostos Community College
Popeye's and Golden Krust on Pitkin and Pennsylvania Avenues in East New York
The Patterson, Mitchell, Mott Haven and Millbrook Houses
Thessalonia Baptist Church and the Futa Islamic Center in Morrisania
WHEDCO's Two Affordable Housing Centers in the Bronx
The Intersection of Flatbush and Church Avenues in Flatbush Brooklyn
The Intersection of White Plains and Gun Hill Roads in the Bronx
Heffen Park and the Eastchester Houses in the Northeast Bronx
"Old Timers Day" in Crotona Park ( First Sunday of Every August)
The point here is this. With the exception of biker and country music bars, orthodox Jewish synagogues, American Legion Halls in small towns, or the "white section" of the yard, or day room in a New York State Prison. the major places I know where white males predominate are centers of wealth and power and influence
In contrast, the places where white men are rarely found are places where working class people, immigrants and.poor people are the majority
When that situation begins evening out, I will become more vigilant about defending white men from slights, insults and government policies designed to give long excluded populations greater access to power
Sonia Sotomayor only threatens people who fear competition for the positions they have monopolized throughout American History.
This white male thinks she will bring a breath of fresh air to the US Supreme
May 29, 2009
But though I have been a white male a long time, I have been lucky enough to spend a great deal of time in places where people like me are rarely found, as well as in places where ONLY people like me are present, and the contrast between those places is worth pointing out
. To help put the position of white men in American society in perspective, especially relative to Latina women and other women of color, I am going to identify a number of places where white men are the overwhelmingly dominant group, and then indicated some spaces where white men are an in a tiny minority. You can then draw your own conclusions, after comparing the two lists, about whether white man are in imminent danger of being unfairly displaced from position of status and influence
Places I Have Been, or Visited, Where White Men Predominate and Women of Color Rarely Appear
The United States Senate
The Trading Floor of the US Stock Exchange
The Partners Room in Major New York Law Firms
Peter Lugar's Steakhouse and Il Molino Restaurant
The Bar at Most New York Area Golf Clubs and Country Clubs
The New York Athletic Club
The Press Box at Yankee Stadium
Any Tennis Club in the Hamptons
Ski Resorts in Aspen and Vail
Breezy Point aka "The Irish Riviera" ( in the Rockaways)
Places I Have Been Where White Men ( Present Company Excluded) Rarely Appear and Women of Color are Highly Visible
The Hub ( A Major Shopping District in the South Bronx)
Fulton Mall
Hostos Community College
Popeye's and Golden Krust on Pitkin and Pennsylvania Avenues in East New York
The Patterson, Mitchell, Mott Haven and Millbrook Houses
Thessalonia Baptist Church and the Futa Islamic Center in Morrisania
WHEDCO's Two Affordable Housing Centers in the Bronx
The Intersection of Flatbush and Church Avenues in Flatbush Brooklyn
The Intersection of White Plains and Gun Hill Roads in the Bronx
Heffen Park and the Eastchester Houses in the Northeast Bronx
"Old Timers Day" in Crotona Park ( First Sunday of Every August)
The point here is this. With the exception of biker and country music bars, orthodox Jewish synagogues, American Legion Halls in small towns, or the "white section" of the yard, or day room in a New York State Prison. the major places I know where white males predominate are centers of wealth and power and influence
In contrast, the places where white men are rarely found are places where working class people, immigrants and.poor people are the majority
When that situation begins evening out, I will become more vigilant about defending white men from slights, insults and government policies designed to give long excluded populations greater access to power
Sonia Sotomayor only threatens people who fear competition for the positions they have monopolized throughout American History.
This white male thinks she will bring a breath of fresh air to the US Supreme
May 29, 2009
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Sonia Sotomayor's Appointment Highlights a Time When Public Housing Was a Place of Hope
Sonia Sotomayor's Appointment Highlights a Time When Public Housing Was a Place of Hope and Possibility for Working Class Families in the Bronx
Dr Mark NaisonFordham University
There are many wonderful things about Sonia Sotomayor's appointment to the US Supreme Court, but one of special interest to me, as a scholar of Bronx history, is the way it highlights an era when public housing was a place of hope and possibility for working class families in the borough.
Today, public housing is widely viewed as a failed experiment in social policy, a place where poor and troubled families are warehoused in prison like conditions that breed crime, violence and apathy. But Sonia Sotomayor's experience of growing up in the Bronxdale houses, a low rise public housing development in the Soundview section of the Bronx that opened in the mid 1950's, recall a different reality. The Bronxdale houses, like many other public housing projects that were built in Bronx in the early and mid 1950's, were filled with families of World War II veterans looking to escape crowded tenements and rooming houses and their airy apartments, spacious, well kept grounds, seemed like wonderful places to bring up children, Not only were the projects designed with green space, playgrounds and outdoor sitting areas where parents could watch their children, they had community centers on premises and schools conveniently located within walking distance of the buildings.
In those years, there was no stigma attached to living in "the projects." To the contrary, many residents took tremendous pride in the beauty of their surroundings. Allen Jones who wrote a book about his Bronx experiences called "The Rat That Got Away" recalls friends and relatives of people who moved into the Patterson Houses in Mott Haven walking through the grounds in sheer wonder at the meticulously maintained lawns and litter free walkways, while Connie Questell, in an oral history interview she did with the Bronx African American History Project boasted that the Japanese Gardens in the nearby Melrose Houses was a favorite Sunday strolling site for Bronx families
But for many residents the social atmosphere of the projects was as much an attraction as spacious apartments and well maintained grounds For Black and Latino families especially, who experienced extreme segregation in the private housing market during those years, public housing in the Bronx represented their first experience with living in an integrated neighborhood.. Taur Orange, a college administrator who grew up in the Bronxdale Houses at the same time Sonia Sotomayor did, remembers Bronxdale as a "little United Nations" and recalls Black, Jewish, Italian, Latino and Asian mothers sitting on the project benches watching their children and sharing stories and recipes. Vicki Archibald Good a social work supervisor,who grew up in the Patterson Houses with her brother, basketball legend Nate "Tiny" Archibald recalls families of every nationality playing together, raising children together, and sharing each other's food and music and while Allen Jones, and Nathan Dukes, another Patterson resident fondly remember days when everyone regardless of race, sang doo wop, danced Latin and would defend their project against all rivals, on or off project grounds.
From 1950, when the Patterson Houses opened, through the early 1960's, public housing in the Bronx, low income and moderate income, located as far north as the Edenwald Houses( near the Mount Vernon border), as far West as the Sedgwick Houses ( right near the George Washington Bridge) as far east as Castle Hill Houses( near the Whitestone Bridge) and as far South as the Millbrook Houses ( near the Triboro Bridge) represented a great urban success story, a place where tens of thousands of working class families found a safe, health envirnoment to raise children, and where thousands of young people grew up to become successful, productive citiznes, some of whom would make a tremendous mark on their nation as scholars, scientiests, writers, musicians, journalists, athletes and leaders in government and public service. Over time, the atmosphere in the projects would deteriorate. As the first generation of families moved out to buy homes or middle income Co-Ops, they would be replaced with poorer, more troubled families, many of them on public assistance, and a combinatinon of job losses, drug epidemics and white flight would erode the spirt of community and feelings of optimism that these developments had once been known for.. These problems would be intensified by budget cuts that would reduce the quality of project maintenance, leaving lawns poorly cared for, hallways and grounds filled with debris, and elevators in need of repair, and local community centers deprived of needed staff Nevertheless, Bronx housing projects never became the broken, hopeless urban concentration camps that many people imagine them to be. The Bronx Rivers and Bronxdale Houses, along with many other projects in the South and West Bronx, were important sites in the development of Bronx Hip Hop, hosting the early parties and jams of pioneering Bronx DJ's like Afrika Bambatta, Jazzy Jay, Disco King Mario, and Grandmaster Flash. And even through the present, Bronx projects house thousands of senior citizens who have lived in them for fifty plus years, and who refuse to move because their neighbors look out for and take care of them But the most important thing to remember, at a time when develoment of affordable large scale multiple dwellings has been neglected for more than a generation (,while huge high rises for the rich dot the urban landscape all over Manhattan and North Brooklyn) is that public housing was a tremendous success when it was rich in social services, provided excellent daily maintenance and was careful in its tenant selection.
Sonia Sotomayor's inspiring life story is one of many nurtured in the heyday of public housing in New York. There is no reason we can't provide this kind of opportunity for a new generation of children growing up in families of modest means.
Mark Naison
May 28, 2009
Dr Mark NaisonFordham University
There are many wonderful things about Sonia Sotomayor's appointment to the US Supreme Court, but one of special interest to me, as a scholar of Bronx history, is the way it highlights an era when public housing was a place of hope and possibility for working class families in the borough.
Today, public housing is widely viewed as a failed experiment in social policy, a place where poor and troubled families are warehoused in prison like conditions that breed crime, violence and apathy. But Sonia Sotomayor's experience of growing up in the Bronxdale houses, a low rise public housing development in the Soundview section of the Bronx that opened in the mid 1950's, recall a different reality. The Bronxdale houses, like many other public housing projects that were built in Bronx in the early and mid 1950's, were filled with families of World War II veterans looking to escape crowded tenements and rooming houses and their airy apartments, spacious, well kept grounds, seemed like wonderful places to bring up children, Not only were the projects designed with green space, playgrounds and outdoor sitting areas where parents could watch their children, they had community centers on premises and schools conveniently located within walking distance of the buildings.
In those years, there was no stigma attached to living in "the projects." To the contrary, many residents took tremendous pride in the beauty of their surroundings. Allen Jones who wrote a book about his Bronx experiences called "The Rat That Got Away" recalls friends and relatives of people who moved into the Patterson Houses in Mott Haven walking through the grounds in sheer wonder at the meticulously maintained lawns and litter free walkways, while Connie Questell, in an oral history interview she did with the Bronx African American History Project boasted that the Japanese Gardens in the nearby Melrose Houses was a favorite Sunday strolling site for Bronx families
But for many residents the social atmosphere of the projects was as much an attraction as spacious apartments and well maintained grounds For Black and Latino families especially, who experienced extreme segregation in the private housing market during those years, public housing in the Bronx represented their first experience with living in an integrated neighborhood.. Taur Orange, a college administrator who grew up in the Bronxdale Houses at the same time Sonia Sotomayor did, remembers Bronxdale as a "little United Nations" and recalls Black, Jewish, Italian, Latino and Asian mothers sitting on the project benches watching their children and sharing stories and recipes. Vicki Archibald Good a social work supervisor,who grew up in the Patterson Houses with her brother, basketball legend Nate "Tiny" Archibald recalls families of every nationality playing together, raising children together, and sharing each other's food and music and while Allen Jones, and Nathan Dukes, another Patterson resident fondly remember days when everyone regardless of race, sang doo wop, danced Latin and would defend their project against all rivals, on or off project grounds.
From 1950, when the Patterson Houses opened, through the early 1960's, public housing in the Bronx, low income and moderate income, located as far north as the Edenwald Houses( near the Mount Vernon border), as far West as the Sedgwick Houses ( right near the George Washington Bridge) as far east as Castle Hill Houses( near the Whitestone Bridge) and as far South as the Millbrook Houses ( near the Triboro Bridge) represented a great urban success story, a place where tens of thousands of working class families found a safe, health envirnoment to raise children, and where thousands of young people grew up to become successful, productive citiznes, some of whom would make a tremendous mark on their nation as scholars, scientiests, writers, musicians, journalists, athletes and leaders in government and public service. Over time, the atmosphere in the projects would deteriorate. As the first generation of families moved out to buy homes or middle income Co-Ops, they would be replaced with poorer, more troubled families, many of them on public assistance, and a combinatinon of job losses, drug epidemics and white flight would erode the spirt of community and feelings of optimism that these developments had once been known for.. These problems would be intensified by budget cuts that would reduce the quality of project maintenance, leaving lawns poorly cared for, hallways and grounds filled with debris, and elevators in need of repair, and local community centers deprived of needed staff Nevertheless, Bronx housing projects never became the broken, hopeless urban concentration camps that many people imagine them to be. The Bronx Rivers and Bronxdale Houses, along with many other projects in the South and West Bronx, were important sites in the development of Bronx Hip Hop, hosting the early parties and jams of pioneering Bronx DJ's like Afrika Bambatta, Jazzy Jay, Disco King Mario, and Grandmaster Flash. And even through the present, Bronx projects house thousands of senior citizens who have lived in them for fifty plus years, and who refuse to move because their neighbors look out for and take care of them But the most important thing to remember, at a time when develoment of affordable large scale multiple dwellings has been neglected for more than a generation (,while huge high rises for the rich dot the urban landscape all over Manhattan and North Brooklyn) is that public housing was a tremendous success when it was rich in social services, provided excellent daily maintenance and was careful in its tenant selection.
Sonia Sotomayor's inspiring life story is one of many nurtured in the heyday of public housing in New York. There is no reason we can't provide this kind of opportunity for a new generation of children growing up in families of modest means.
Mark Naison
May 28, 2009
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
For Most Americans, The Worst Consequences of the Economic Crisis Are Yet To Come
For Most Americans, The Worst Consequences of The Economic Crisis Are Yet To Come
Dr Mark Naison
Fordham University
If you read the newspapers, watch the news, and search the internet for new of the economic crisis, you will get the impression that the global recession is easing and may soon "bottom out." The Obama Administration's stimulus package, coupled with a infusion of funds into the banking system by TARP and the Federal Reserve, has at least temporatily, prevented the nation's largest banks from going under and helped state governments from avoid bankruptcy
But the stabilization of key financial institutions and government actors offers little comfort to tens of millions of Americans who are watching their assest shrink, their jobs disappear, and their dreams and expectations fall by the wayside
For the poorest Americans, the crisis means an increase in hunger and homelessness; food lines are growing longer in every poor and working class neighborhood, and shantytowns resembling Hoovervilles have started to appear in some particularly hard hit cities.
But for most Americans, the crisis has brought an enormous increase in stress as they try to figure out whether they can still live the way there are accostomed to living, or pursue dreams they had spent much of their lives working for
With jobs disappearing, salaries being frozen, home values plunging, retirement accounts shriking and taxes and tolls soon to go up, millions of people, every month, worry whether they can afford to remain in the house they own or the apartment they live in while still putting food on the table and paying their gas, phone and electric bills. Many, to meet their daily expenses, will have to take in boarders or share their space with another family; others will have to move in with relatives. The privacy they once prized , and viewed as their birthright as member of the middle class, will have to be sacrificed
Those who own stores, or small enterprises, will stay up nights worrying whether declining revenues, and rising debts, will allow them to remain in business for much longer. Unable to get bank loans to tide them through the hard times, they wonder whether they should put all their personal assets up for sale to keep the business going and then face the risk of having nothing at all should the business still go under. Every time you see a store or a gas station with a "for rent" sign, think of the sweat and tears that it took to build and maintain that business and the personal pain and humiliation involved in watching that business fail. As unemployment continues to rise, and consumer demand remains stagnant, there will be a lot more of that humiliation going around
And then think of all the young people who went off to college or graduate school dreaming of the exciting careers awaiting them, only to face job markets offering no opportunities in their field. A poignant example of this is the thousands of people graduating from teachers colleges or participating in Teach for America or the New York City Teaching Fellowship Program, who will not be hired as teachers in New York City because the Department of Education just instituted a hiring freeze. In numerous other fields, the job market is equally dire. Millions of young people with advanced education will have to move into low wage
service industry positions to find employment, in the process pushing working class and immigrant youth into the ranks of the unemployed. If this economic crisis lasts for another five years, we are in danger in producing a "Lost Generation" of young people unable to find jobs in the fields they have been trained for
Some of these displaced youth will respond creatively to their misfortune and become artists, entrepreneurs and political activists, but many more are likely to become bitter and defeated, falling into a lethargy that may make economic recovery even more difficult
We are living in dangerous times. The stress people are under will make many of them snap. Alcoholism, domestic abuse, road rage and gun violence are all increasing as the economic crisis intensifies increasing.
Easing stress on individuals and families has to become a national priority, as well as a personal moral obligation. We have demand that government direct income and resources to those that need it the most, but we also have to help people in need whenever they cross our path, including co workers, family members and neighbors, who have never been in trouble before.
There are some forms of stress than no one can handle alone. It is our job to make sure they don't have to
Mark Naison
May 13, 2009
Dr Mark Naison
Fordham University
If you read the newspapers, watch the news, and search the internet for new of the economic crisis, you will get the impression that the global recession is easing and may soon "bottom out." The Obama Administration's stimulus package, coupled with a infusion of funds into the banking system by TARP and the Federal Reserve, has at least temporatily, prevented the nation's largest banks from going under and helped state governments from avoid bankruptcy
But the stabilization of key financial institutions and government actors offers little comfort to tens of millions of Americans who are watching their assest shrink, their jobs disappear, and their dreams and expectations fall by the wayside
For the poorest Americans, the crisis means an increase in hunger and homelessness; food lines are growing longer in every poor and working class neighborhood, and shantytowns resembling Hoovervilles have started to appear in some particularly hard hit cities.
But for most Americans, the crisis has brought an enormous increase in stress as they try to figure out whether they can still live the way there are accostomed to living, or pursue dreams they had spent much of their lives working for
With jobs disappearing, salaries being frozen, home values plunging, retirement accounts shriking and taxes and tolls soon to go up, millions of people, every month, worry whether they can afford to remain in the house they own or the apartment they live in while still putting food on the table and paying their gas, phone and electric bills. Many, to meet their daily expenses, will have to take in boarders or share their space with another family; others will have to move in with relatives. The privacy they once prized , and viewed as their birthright as member of the middle class, will have to be sacrificed
Those who own stores, or small enterprises, will stay up nights worrying whether declining revenues, and rising debts, will allow them to remain in business for much longer. Unable to get bank loans to tide them through the hard times, they wonder whether they should put all their personal assets up for sale to keep the business going and then face the risk of having nothing at all should the business still go under. Every time you see a store or a gas station with a "for rent" sign, think of the sweat and tears that it took to build and maintain that business and the personal pain and humiliation involved in watching that business fail. As unemployment continues to rise, and consumer demand remains stagnant, there will be a lot more of that humiliation going around
And then think of all the young people who went off to college or graduate school dreaming of the exciting careers awaiting them, only to face job markets offering no opportunities in their field. A poignant example of this is the thousands of people graduating from teachers colleges or participating in Teach for America or the New York City Teaching Fellowship Program, who will not be hired as teachers in New York City because the Department of Education just instituted a hiring freeze. In numerous other fields, the job market is equally dire. Millions of young people with advanced education will have to move into low wage
service industry positions to find employment, in the process pushing working class and immigrant youth into the ranks of the unemployed. If this economic crisis lasts for another five years, we are in danger in producing a "Lost Generation" of young people unable to find jobs in the fields they have been trained for
Some of these displaced youth will respond creatively to their misfortune and become artists, entrepreneurs and political activists, but many more are likely to become bitter and defeated, falling into a lethargy that may make economic recovery even more difficult
We are living in dangerous times. The stress people are under will make many of them snap. Alcoholism, domestic abuse, road rage and gun violence are all increasing as the economic crisis intensifies increasing.
Easing stress on individuals and families has to become a national priority, as well as a personal moral obligation. We have demand that government direct income and resources to those that need it the most, but we also have to help people in need whenever they cross our path, including co workers, family members and neighbors, who have never been in trouble before.
There are some forms of stress than no one can handle alone. It is our job to make sure they don't have to
Mark Naison
May 13, 2009
Monday, May 4, 2009
Why The Harlem Tradition of Radical Street Speaking Needs to Be Revived
The Street as a Site of Political Activism, Entrepreneurship and Community Building in African American History
Dr Mark Naison
Fordham University
” (Marcus) Garvey voiced the marvelous nature of his own rise when he asked . . . ‘how come this New Negro? How comes this stunned awakening/’ The ground had been prepared for him by such outspoken voices as those of Hubert H Harrison, A Philip Randolph, Chandler Owen, and WA Domingo. These and other stepladder orators- who began speaking along Lenox Avenue with the arrival of warm weather in 1916 and whose number rapidly grew with each succeeding summer- were the persons, who along with Garvey, converted the black community of Harlem into a parliament of the people during the years of World War I and after.”
Robert Hill, “Introduction,” in Marcus Garvey: Lfe and Lessons ( Berkely: University of California Press, 1987)
The quote I just read, about how street orators transformed Harlem into a “parliament of the people” during and after World War I, may seem tangential in a conference on Street Vending, but the remarks that follow hope to establish its relevance. The goal of my paper is to situate “street vending” as a site of popular resistance in the context of a long history of street based activism and community building within African American Communities. In doing so, I am responding to a discussion, which took place at a NY/Berlin Conference last September, on whether street vending is a constructive and politically responsible form of economic activity for immigrant and marginalized populations Based on what I have seen and studied in US Black and Latino communities, I view the defense of street vending as an important arena of political struggle in the global metropolis It is my contention that attacks on working class, immigrant presence in the public sphere, which have been going in Black and other minority neighborhoods in the US for the last forty years, have led to the virtual elimination of Black and Latino radicalism as a force in American life, promoted class and income segregation in urban areas, encouraged the growth of the prison industrial complex and have promoted gentrification and demographic inversion in many nations cities. So complete has this process been that young people today cannot even imagine a time when Black neighborhoods were filled with orators expounding their political philosophies from soapboxes and step ladders and when radical and nationalist newspapers were sold by hawkers in virtually every business district serving black communities. My goal is not only to remind the current generation of activists of a sixty year period between the onset of World War I and the early 1970’s when the streets in Black communities were filled with orators promoting a wide variety of radical philosophies, but to urge that this tradition of radical street speaking be reinvented and restored under the banner of ”The Right to the Streets” and “The Right to the City.” As the historical narrative that follows will point out, this tradition of street speaking not only encouraged learning and discussion among working class people, it led directly to militant confrontational political activism, ranging from hunger marches and protests against eviction, to boycott neighborhood business that refused to hire blacks, to commodity riots and protests against police brutality.
I am not alone in viewing street vending as a form of resistance to economic marginalization and to neo liberal efforts to assure an orderly and sanitized public sphere in neighborhoods targeted for gentrification The legal scholar Regina Austin made a similar argument in her 2000 Article in the Yale Law Review “Many blacks” Austin argues,” rightly understand that the line between the legal and the illegal in the area of economic activist is ephemeral and that the determination of the precise point at which the line is drawn is a matter of political struggle. Accordingly, blacks need to be in the thick of the battle, fighting for their interests. This means condoning, abetting and sometimes even engaging in illegal activity.”
This is not to say that all street vending is inevitably progressive, any more than other forms of street based economic activity, from drug dealing, to gambling, to fencing stolen goods, are inherently progressive. But given how effectively elites have deprived immigrant and minority people of outlets for political protest during the last forty years, I am prone to regard activities which bring income to undocumented and marginalized populations, especially those which circumvent the law, as important forms of resistance to patterns of urban governance which reinforce social inequality
The relationship between street vending, political activism and repressive patterns of urban governance was brought home to me, with brutal clarity, by an incident involving two members of the revolutionary hip hop group Rebel Diaz in June of last year. Rodrigo and Gonzalo Venegas, the MC and DJ of Rebel Diaz, were taking a friend on a tour of the Hunts Point neighborhood where they lived when they came upon police and Health Department officials confiscating the fruit of a Mexican street vendor. When the Venegas brothers interceded in the vendors behalf, first to translate the police’s commands into Spanish, then to try to allow the vendor to keep his fruit, they were cursed at and threatened by the officers at the scene, and then, when they asked for the officers badge numbers, thrown to the ground, beaten and arrested. This entire episode, captured by the Venegas brother’s friend on his cell phone, was sent out as a video to members of Rebel Diaz artistic and political network and within less than two hours there were nearly one hundred demonstrators picketing the police precinct where the Venegas brothers were being held, demanding their release. What was amazing to me, as a participant in this demonstration, was that the captain of the precinct refused to release the brothers despite damning visual evidence of police misconduct and mounting signs that this incident would be a rallying point for activists around the city. The imperative to maintain police authority through intimidation and illegal force in this immigrant and working class neighborhood was so powerful that neither local elected officials, nor the District attorney, were willing to try to get charges dismissed. A year later, the Venegas brothers still face charges from this incident, a telling reminder of how little standing street vendors and black and brown youth have in the calculations, and governance strategy of those making and enforcing the law.
In the light of this misuse of state power against immigrants exercising the right to make a living, and of activists exercising the right of free speech, it is critically important to recall a time in New York history, when black activists, and their allies claimed Harlem street corners as a space to expound radical political philosophies, and defended their right to that space against police and government attacks.
This almost forgotten tradition of Harlem street speaking, which in its various phases featured leaders like Hubert Harrison, A. Phillip Randolph, Audley “Queen Mother” Moore, Benjamin Davis Jr,. Rev Adam Clayton Power Jr, Carlos Cooks, Charles Kenyatta, and Malcolm X has been described with great eloquence by Irma Watkins Owens in her book Blood Relations: Caribbean Immigrants and the Harlem Community, 1900-1930. Watkins-Owens writes:
“From World War I through the 1930’s, the unclaimed territory of the Harlem street corner became the testing ground for a range of political ideologies and forum for intellectual inquiry and debate. The open-air arena claimed other adherents as well-barefoot prophets, musicians, healers and traders-competing for the souls and pocketbooks of the urban masses. . . . but on any day of the week, including Sunday, homebound Harlemites emerging from the subway at 135th Street and Lenox Avenue
Would most likely encounter congested sidewalks and the well toned voice of the street orator, often of African Caribbean descent, positioned stop a stepladder and surrounded by crowds of listeners”
As Watkins-Owens account makes clear, Harlem’s step ladder orators shared the street with a variety of people engaged in commercial ventures, ranging from numbers runners, to evangelists ,to street vendors selling products ranging from Southern delicacies (e.g ribs, sweet potatoes and pigs feet) to clothing, to “dream books” for the numbers trade. In an oppressed community, street politics and street economics were, in effect .two sides of the same coin. The population of Harlem, coming from the West Indies and the Spanish Caribbean as well as the American South, not only welcomed speakers calling for an end to racism, white supremacy and colonial rule, they used the streets of their neighborhood to launch a wide variety of income producing activities, whether legal or not, that could compensate for their exclusion from nearly every important section of New York’s labor market.
Because discrimination in the mainstream economy was so fierce, some of Harlem’s best known and most brilliant street speakers used their oratory as an income producing activity, making the line between street speaking and street vending even more porous.
The great Harlem socialist and nationalist Hubert Harrison, widely recognized at the founder of Hatlem’s “Street University” supported himself by collecting pennies and nickels and dimes from the audiences at his street corner lectures, which lasted for hours and touched on subjects ranging from religion, to Greek philosophy, women’s suffrage to the leadership strategy of Booker T Washington. As Harrison’s biography Jeffrey Perry points out, Harrison decided to support himself as a Harlem street speaker only after he was pushed out of his post-office job by Booker T Washington because of his criticism of the Tuskegee leader,, and fired from his position as a lecturer for the Socialist Party for supporting the IWW. Harrison always lived on the edge of poverty, but made enough money from street speaking to pay his rent in a community that was hungry for leadership and hungry for enlightenment. He was also part street vendor, selling books and oils at his lectures!
Harrison’s success, both in attracting audiences, and in raising funds, was not lost on am ambitious young West Indian immigrant named Marcus Garvey Garvey believed that people of African descent were on the bottom rung of every society they were living in, be it in Africa or the Western Hemisphere, and he wanted to build an organization which would unite Blacks to redeem Africa from European rule and to take pride in their
African ancestry Garvey’s message, coming at a time when the self-determination of nations and an end to colonial rule was possible outcome of the World War, electrified audiences on the streets of Harlem, and they invested their energies and contributed their funds to the organization that Garvey created “The Universal Negro Improvement Association.” With the funds Garvey raised from his street speaking, he rented a headquarters in Harlem, which he called Liberty Hall, and founded a newspaper, which he called “The Negro World” started forming chapters wherever his ideas captured Black people’s imaginations. By the early 1920’s, the UNIA had become the largest Black organization ever created, with hundreds of thousands of members all over the United States, and in more than forty different countries. Garvey’s organization eventually foundered due to internal conflicts, financial difficulties and prosecution of its leader for mail fraud by the US Department of Justice, but the power of a message of Black Pride and African Redemption to move the masses of Black people left a powerful impression on Harlem, and would spawn numerous offshoots who would preach some variety of Black nationalism to the people of Harlem and other urban black communities
During the Depression, these small nationalist organizations, along with the Harlem section of the American Communist Party, would give this emerging tradition of street oratory a more activist, confrontational dimension. As unemployment in Harlem rose to over 60 percent, and large numbers of families faced eviction from their homes, local radicals, using soapboxes and street ladders as the platforms, promoted two divergent strategies to ease the economic distress of Harlem’s hard pressed residents. Communists, some white and some black, organized local residents to resist evictions, participate in hunger marches on government agencies and hold sits ins at local charities until their members were given help. By the beginning of 1931, Harlemites had become accustomed to the sight of black and white teams of Communists putting the furniture of evicted families back in apartments and getting aid for starving families by putting charitable organizations under siege. Local nationalist groups, who were suspicious of the Communist message of Black White unity, used their street corner to launch an entirely different movement, a “Don’t Buy Where You Can’t Work” campaign to force Harlem businesses, most of which were owned by whites, to hire Blacks as salesperson. This campaign, concentrating on the large department stores on 125th Street, spread like wildfire and ultimately forced major concessions from Harlem employers, not without controversy about the nationalists allegedly anti-white and anti Semitic rhetoric. But by the mid- 1930’s this combination of Communist and nationalist agitation, taking place daily on scores of Harlem street corners, had created an aroused, and informed community ready to rise up in protest at any manifestation of racism, whether local national or international. In 1935, thousands of people in this community rose up in anger following the arrest, and alleged beating of a Black teenager in a Harlem department store, looting stores and fighting police in a two day uprising that was the first of its kind in modern African American history. No longer would a “Race Riot” consist of mobs of whites invading and attacking Black neighborhoods; now blacks, aroused by street oratory, marches and picket lines, would rise up against the outsiders who controlled their neighborhoods politically or exploited it economically.
This street spawned atmosphere of militancy even spilled over into electoral politics. A new breed of activist politician rose to power in the late Thirties, symbolized by the election to the City Council and then to Congress of Reverend Adam Clayon Powell Jr. Powell, who had been a leader in the “Don’t Buy Where You Can’t Work Campaign” and Communist led campaigns against lynching and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia aroused support for his campaign as much with street corner oratory as through the organizational machine he built in his church.. And his successor on the City Council, Harlem Communist leader Benjamin Davis Jr, who was elected in 1943, followed a similar strategy, using a powerful street team to arouse support for his candidacy headed by the redoubtable Audley (later Queen Mother) Moore. Interestingly enough, the year Davis was elected was the year of the second Harlem Riot, provoked by an incident of police violence involving Black servicemen
This extraordinary tradition of street based activsm came under fierce attack in the post war years as anti-Communism became the dominant ideology throughout American society. Between 1947 and 1956, Communists in Harlem, like their counterparts around the nation, were arrested, deported, called before investigating committees, and forced out of their jobs in the school system, the welfare department, universities and the media. The most famous Harlem Communist of all, Paul Robeson, became a virtual exile in his own land, deprived of his passport, barred from radio, tv and movies, and prevented from singing for pay in most major concert halls. Rank and file Communists, harassed and followed by the FBI, fated even worse- by the late 50’s, the Communist street speaker and Daily Worker salesman had virtually disappeared from Harlem neighborhoods where they once had been a respected presence
But thanks to African American nationalists, many of them in small, obscure organizations, the tradition of Harlem street oratory was kept alive, especially along its main thoroughfare 125th Street. There, the message of Black Unity, Black Pride and African Redemption was being kept alive by leaders like Carlos Cooks of the African Nationalist Pioneer League, Charles Kenyatta of the Mau Mau Society and ex Communists Richard Moore and Audley Moore who spoke in behalf of the elimination of the word “Negro” and the necessity of reparations for people of African descent.
But the most important presence on Harlem streets was a minister of a small Black nationalist religious group which called itself “The Nation of Islam” and preached that white domination of the world was coming to an end and that blacks should separate themselves from the “devil white man” before it was too late. That minister, Malcolm X, electrified Harlem crowds with his attacks on Christianity, mainstream civil rights organizations, and the idea that America could become an integrated society. Malcolm told his audiences that America was so poisoned by racism that it never could reform, and that Blacks had to separate themselves from white influences- and white people- to achieve self-determination and self respect. Using the street corner as his pulpit, Malcolm recruited thousands of members for the Nation of Islam, in Harlem and around the nation, and became the most feared, and respected of Harlem’s street orators.
All of these Harlem nationalists, it should be emphasized, sold more than ideas- they also hawked books, pamphlets, or their organization’s newspaper. The Nation of Islam, in particular, excelled at street commerce, moving thousands of copies of their newspaper Muhammed Speaks on the streets of Harlem each week and selling Nation of Islam produced food products on the street- Shabazz Bean Pies- as sign that they practiced what they preached.
By the mid 1960’s more radical organizations, some with a Marxist tinge, began competing with local nationalists for the ear of Harlem residents, and a new culture of radical opposition began to rise in the community. In the summer of 1964, the police murder of a Black high school students triggered another Harlem Riot, larger and more damaging than the ones that took place in 1964. And a fourth Harlem Riot took place following the murder of Rev Martin Luther King Jr in 1968
However, the late 60’s and early 70’s proved to be the last gasp of a Harlem political culture that depended on street oratory, public protest, and the selling of radical newspapers to disseminate oppositional ideologies and inspire vigilance against control of Harlem by forces outside the community. The major radical organizations of the late 60’s the Black Panther Party and Young Lords Party, suffered a wave of political repression almost as fierce as what confronted the Communist Party in the post war era and had virtually disappeared from Harlem by the mid 1970’s. Nationalist groups also suffered a decline, as the Nation of Islam split between those, led by Wallace Muhammed, who wanted the organization to embrace Sunni Islam, and those, led by Louis Farrakhan, who wanted to stay true to the Black Supremacist philosophy of the Nation’s founder Elijah Muhammed.
The collapse of that culture left Harlem relatively helpless in the face of an array of tragedies that beset that community from the early 70’s to the mid 90’s, beginning with an arson and abandonment cycle that destroyed much local housing, a city Fiscal Crisis that radically cut social services, especially fire, sanitation and youth programs; and finally a crack epidemic that destroyed families and eroded the neighborhoods sense of safety even as it made fortunes for a small number of high level dealers. By the time the crack epidemic had run its course in the mid 90’s, the community had been politically demobilized to such a degree that it was unable to resist the mass incarceration of large numbers of its youth, and unable to develop a viable opposition to the Guiliani administration’s plan to redevelop Harlem as a potential site of middle class settlement amidst scare Manhattan real estate.
This is not to say that there was no street level resistance in Harlem to strategies of elite control or plans to develop the community in ways that displaced its residents. Street entrepreneurship of various kinds, often pioneered by African immigrants, continued to flourish, even in the face of opposition from local merchants; hip hop jams commanded space in parks and playgrounds even without permits, taking their electricity from the bottom of light poles, and Al Sharpton and other leaders kept the community vigilant in the face of incidents of police brutality in Black neighborhoods and mob attacks on black people in neighborhoods like Bensonhurst and Howard Beach. The Black nationalist tradition was kept alive in portions of hip hop and in movements like Louis Farrkhan’s Million Man March
But the tradition of street oratory which kept Harlemites vigilant on a daily basis to racial and economic injustice was gone for good. There were no more Hubert Harrisons, no more Marcus Garveys, no more Audley Moores, no more Malcolm X’s. There were no Communist street speakers demanding that furniture of evicted families be moved back into vacant apartments; no nationalist orators demanding that Black owned business be given preference over Burger King and Starbucks. And so, a community battered by disinvestment, drug epidemics, mass incarceration, and the collapse of social services, suddenly became, when the economy revived, a hot new neighborhood for the upper middle class, filled with condos, chain stores, and chic cafes.
As working class Harlemites find themselves more and more powerless, doubled up in apartments or forced to move to the Bronx because of rising rents, we need to ask- is a community without street speakers, and street vendors and protest meetings a better place, and if better, better for whom?
Some traditions aren’t missed when they are gone, but if working class people are to have any power in this city, street speaking and street agitation is a tradition that needs to be brought back
Mark Naison
May3, 2009
Dr Mark Naison
Fordham University
” (Marcus) Garvey voiced the marvelous nature of his own rise when he asked . . . ‘how come this New Negro? How comes this stunned awakening/’ The ground had been prepared for him by such outspoken voices as those of Hubert H Harrison, A Philip Randolph, Chandler Owen, and WA Domingo. These and other stepladder orators- who began speaking along Lenox Avenue with the arrival of warm weather in 1916 and whose number rapidly grew with each succeeding summer- were the persons, who along with Garvey, converted the black community of Harlem into a parliament of the people during the years of World War I and after.”
Robert Hill, “Introduction,” in Marcus Garvey: Lfe and Lessons ( Berkely: University of California Press, 1987)
The quote I just read, about how street orators transformed Harlem into a “parliament of the people” during and after World War I, may seem tangential in a conference on Street Vending, but the remarks that follow hope to establish its relevance. The goal of my paper is to situate “street vending” as a site of popular resistance in the context of a long history of street based activism and community building within African American Communities. In doing so, I am responding to a discussion, which took place at a NY/Berlin Conference last September, on whether street vending is a constructive and politically responsible form of economic activity for immigrant and marginalized populations Based on what I have seen and studied in US Black and Latino communities, I view the defense of street vending as an important arena of political struggle in the global metropolis It is my contention that attacks on working class, immigrant presence in the public sphere, which have been going in Black and other minority neighborhoods in the US for the last forty years, have led to the virtual elimination of Black and Latino radicalism as a force in American life, promoted class and income segregation in urban areas, encouraged the growth of the prison industrial complex and have promoted gentrification and demographic inversion in many nations cities. So complete has this process been that young people today cannot even imagine a time when Black neighborhoods were filled with orators expounding their political philosophies from soapboxes and step ladders and when radical and nationalist newspapers were sold by hawkers in virtually every business district serving black communities. My goal is not only to remind the current generation of activists of a sixty year period between the onset of World War I and the early 1970’s when the streets in Black communities were filled with orators promoting a wide variety of radical philosophies, but to urge that this tradition of radical street speaking be reinvented and restored under the banner of ”The Right to the Streets” and “The Right to the City.” As the historical narrative that follows will point out, this tradition of street speaking not only encouraged learning and discussion among working class people, it led directly to militant confrontational political activism, ranging from hunger marches and protests against eviction, to boycott neighborhood business that refused to hire blacks, to commodity riots and protests against police brutality.
I am not alone in viewing street vending as a form of resistance to economic marginalization and to neo liberal efforts to assure an orderly and sanitized public sphere in neighborhoods targeted for gentrification The legal scholar Regina Austin made a similar argument in her 2000 Article in the Yale Law Review “Many blacks” Austin argues,” rightly understand that the line between the legal and the illegal in the area of economic activist is ephemeral and that the determination of the precise point at which the line is drawn is a matter of political struggle. Accordingly, blacks need to be in the thick of the battle, fighting for their interests. This means condoning, abetting and sometimes even engaging in illegal activity.”
This is not to say that all street vending is inevitably progressive, any more than other forms of street based economic activity, from drug dealing, to gambling, to fencing stolen goods, are inherently progressive. But given how effectively elites have deprived immigrant and minority people of outlets for political protest during the last forty years, I am prone to regard activities which bring income to undocumented and marginalized populations, especially those which circumvent the law, as important forms of resistance to patterns of urban governance which reinforce social inequality
The relationship between street vending, political activism and repressive patterns of urban governance was brought home to me, with brutal clarity, by an incident involving two members of the revolutionary hip hop group Rebel Diaz in June of last year. Rodrigo and Gonzalo Venegas, the MC and DJ of Rebel Diaz, were taking a friend on a tour of the Hunts Point neighborhood where they lived when they came upon police and Health Department officials confiscating the fruit of a Mexican street vendor. When the Venegas brothers interceded in the vendors behalf, first to translate the police’s commands into Spanish, then to try to allow the vendor to keep his fruit, they were cursed at and threatened by the officers at the scene, and then, when they asked for the officers badge numbers, thrown to the ground, beaten and arrested. This entire episode, captured by the Venegas brother’s friend on his cell phone, was sent out as a video to members of Rebel Diaz artistic and political network and within less than two hours there were nearly one hundred demonstrators picketing the police precinct where the Venegas brothers were being held, demanding their release. What was amazing to me, as a participant in this demonstration, was that the captain of the precinct refused to release the brothers despite damning visual evidence of police misconduct and mounting signs that this incident would be a rallying point for activists around the city. The imperative to maintain police authority through intimidation and illegal force in this immigrant and working class neighborhood was so powerful that neither local elected officials, nor the District attorney, were willing to try to get charges dismissed. A year later, the Venegas brothers still face charges from this incident, a telling reminder of how little standing street vendors and black and brown youth have in the calculations, and governance strategy of those making and enforcing the law.
In the light of this misuse of state power against immigrants exercising the right to make a living, and of activists exercising the right of free speech, it is critically important to recall a time in New York history, when black activists, and their allies claimed Harlem street corners as a space to expound radical political philosophies, and defended their right to that space against police and government attacks.
This almost forgotten tradition of Harlem street speaking, which in its various phases featured leaders like Hubert Harrison, A. Phillip Randolph, Audley “Queen Mother” Moore, Benjamin Davis Jr,. Rev Adam Clayton Power Jr, Carlos Cooks, Charles Kenyatta, and Malcolm X has been described with great eloquence by Irma Watkins Owens in her book Blood Relations: Caribbean Immigrants and the Harlem Community, 1900-1930. Watkins-Owens writes:
“From World War I through the 1930’s, the unclaimed territory of the Harlem street corner became the testing ground for a range of political ideologies and forum for intellectual inquiry and debate. The open-air arena claimed other adherents as well-barefoot prophets, musicians, healers and traders-competing for the souls and pocketbooks of the urban masses. . . . but on any day of the week, including Sunday, homebound Harlemites emerging from the subway at 135th Street and Lenox Avenue
Would most likely encounter congested sidewalks and the well toned voice of the street orator, often of African Caribbean descent, positioned stop a stepladder and surrounded by crowds of listeners”
As Watkins-Owens account makes clear, Harlem’s step ladder orators shared the street with a variety of people engaged in commercial ventures, ranging from numbers runners, to evangelists ,to street vendors selling products ranging from Southern delicacies (e.g ribs, sweet potatoes and pigs feet) to clothing, to “dream books” for the numbers trade. In an oppressed community, street politics and street economics were, in effect .two sides of the same coin. The population of Harlem, coming from the West Indies and the Spanish Caribbean as well as the American South, not only welcomed speakers calling for an end to racism, white supremacy and colonial rule, they used the streets of their neighborhood to launch a wide variety of income producing activities, whether legal or not, that could compensate for their exclusion from nearly every important section of New York’s labor market.
Because discrimination in the mainstream economy was so fierce, some of Harlem’s best known and most brilliant street speakers used their oratory as an income producing activity, making the line between street speaking and street vending even more porous.
The great Harlem socialist and nationalist Hubert Harrison, widely recognized at the founder of Hatlem’s “Street University” supported himself by collecting pennies and nickels and dimes from the audiences at his street corner lectures, which lasted for hours and touched on subjects ranging from religion, to Greek philosophy, women’s suffrage to the leadership strategy of Booker T Washington. As Harrison’s biography Jeffrey Perry points out, Harrison decided to support himself as a Harlem street speaker only after he was pushed out of his post-office job by Booker T Washington because of his criticism of the Tuskegee leader,, and fired from his position as a lecturer for the Socialist Party for supporting the IWW. Harrison always lived on the edge of poverty, but made enough money from street speaking to pay his rent in a community that was hungry for leadership and hungry for enlightenment. He was also part street vendor, selling books and oils at his lectures!
Harrison’s success, both in attracting audiences, and in raising funds, was not lost on am ambitious young West Indian immigrant named Marcus Garvey Garvey believed that people of African descent were on the bottom rung of every society they were living in, be it in Africa or the Western Hemisphere, and he wanted to build an organization which would unite Blacks to redeem Africa from European rule and to take pride in their
African ancestry Garvey’s message, coming at a time when the self-determination of nations and an end to colonial rule was possible outcome of the World War, electrified audiences on the streets of Harlem, and they invested their energies and contributed their funds to the organization that Garvey created “The Universal Negro Improvement Association.” With the funds Garvey raised from his street speaking, he rented a headquarters in Harlem, which he called Liberty Hall, and founded a newspaper, which he called “The Negro World” started forming chapters wherever his ideas captured Black people’s imaginations. By the early 1920’s, the UNIA had become the largest Black organization ever created, with hundreds of thousands of members all over the United States, and in more than forty different countries. Garvey’s organization eventually foundered due to internal conflicts, financial difficulties and prosecution of its leader for mail fraud by the US Department of Justice, but the power of a message of Black Pride and African Redemption to move the masses of Black people left a powerful impression on Harlem, and would spawn numerous offshoots who would preach some variety of Black nationalism to the people of Harlem and other urban black communities
During the Depression, these small nationalist organizations, along with the Harlem section of the American Communist Party, would give this emerging tradition of street oratory a more activist, confrontational dimension. As unemployment in Harlem rose to over 60 percent, and large numbers of families faced eviction from their homes, local radicals, using soapboxes and street ladders as the platforms, promoted two divergent strategies to ease the economic distress of Harlem’s hard pressed residents. Communists, some white and some black, organized local residents to resist evictions, participate in hunger marches on government agencies and hold sits ins at local charities until their members were given help. By the beginning of 1931, Harlemites had become accustomed to the sight of black and white teams of Communists putting the furniture of evicted families back in apartments and getting aid for starving families by putting charitable organizations under siege. Local nationalist groups, who were suspicious of the Communist message of Black White unity, used their street corner to launch an entirely different movement, a “Don’t Buy Where You Can’t Work” campaign to force Harlem businesses, most of which were owned by whites, to hire Blacks as salesperson. This campaign, concentrating on the large department stores on 125th Street, spread like wildfire and ultimately forced major concessions from Harlem employers, not without controversy about the nationalists allegedly anti-white and anti Semitic rhetoric. But by the mid- 1930’s this combination of Communist and nationalist agitation, taking place daily on scores of Harlem street corners, had created an aroused, and informed community ready to rise up in protest at any manifestation of racism, whether local national or international. In 1935, thousands of people in this community rose up in anger following the arrest, and alleged beating of a Black teenager in a Harlem department store, looting stores and fighting police in a two day uprising that was the first of its kind in modern African American history. No longer would a “Race Riot” consist of mobs of whites invading and attacking Black neighborhoods; now blacks, aroused by street oratory, marches and picket lines, would rise up against the outsiders who controlled their neighborhoods politically or exploited it economically.
This street spawned atmosphere of militancy even spilled over into electoral politics. A new breed of activist politician rose to power in the late Thirties, symbolized by the election to the City Council and then to Congress of Reverend Adam Clayon Powell Jr. Powell, who had been a leader in the “Don’t Buy Where You Can’t Work Campaign” and Communist led campaigns against lynching and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia aroused support for his campaign as much with street corner oratory as through the organizational machine he built in his church.. And his successor on the City Council, Harlem Communist leader Benjamin Davis Jr, who was elected in 1943, followed a similar strategy, using a powerful street team to arouse support for his candidacy headed by the redoubtable Audley (later Queen Mother) Moore. Interestingly enough, the year Davis was elected was the year of the second Harlem Riot, provoked by an incident of police violence involving Black servicemen
This extraordinary tradition of street based activsm came under fierce attack in the post war years as anti-Communism became the dominant ideology throughout American society. Between 1947 and 1956, Communists in Harlem, like their counterparts around the nation, were arrested, deported, called before investigating committees, and forced out of their jobs in the school system, the welfare department, universities and the media. The most famous Harlem Communist of all, Paul Robeson, became a virtual exile in his own land, deprived of his passport, barred from radio, tv and movies, and prevented from singing for pay in most major concert halls. Rank and file Communists, harassed and followed by the FBI, fated even worse- by the late 50’s, the Communist street speaker and Daily Worker salesman had virtually disappeared from Harlem neighborhoods where they once had been a respected presence
But thanks to African American nationalists, many of them in small, obscure organizations, the tradition of Harlem street oratory was kept alive, especially along its main thoroughfare 125th Street. There, the message of Black Unity, Black Pride and African Redemption was being kept alive by leaders like Carlos Cooks of the African Nationalist Pioneer League, Charles Kenyatta of the Mau Mau Society and ex Communists Richard Moore and Audley Moore who spoke in behalf of the elimination of the word “Negro” and the necessity of reparations for people of African descent.
But the most important presence on Harlem streets was a minister of a small Black nationalist religious group which called itself “The Nation of Islam” and preached that white domination of the world was coming to an end and that blacks should separate themselves from the “devil white man” before it was too late. That minister, Malcolm X, electrified Harlem crowds with his attacks on Christianity, mainstream civil rights organizations, and the idea that America could become an integrated society. Malcolm told his audiences that America was so poisoned by racism that it never could reform, and that Blacks had to separate themselves from white influences- and white people- to achieve self-determination and self respect. Using the street corner as his pulpit, Malcolm recruited thousands of members for the Nation of Islam, in Harlem and around the nation, and became the most feared, and respected of Harlem’s street orators.
All of these Harlem nationalists, it should be emphasized, sold more than ideas- they also hawked books, pamphlets, or their organization’s newspaper. The Nation of Islam, in particular, excelled at street commerce, moving thousands of copies of their newspaper Muhammed Speaks on the streets of Harlem each week and selling Nation of Islam produced food products on the street- Shabazz Bean Pies- as sign that they practiced what they preached.
By the mid 1960’s more radical organizations, some with a Marxist tinge, began competing with local nationalists for the ear of Harlem residents, and a new culture of radical opposition began to rise in the community. In the summer of 1964, the police murder of a Black high school students triggered another Harlem Riot, larger and more damaging than the ones that took place in 1964. And a fourth Harlem Riot took place following the murder of Rev Martin Luther King Jr in 1968
However, the late 60’s and early 70’s proved to be the last gasp of a Harlem political culture that depended on street oratory, public protest, and the selling of radical newspapers to disseminate oppositional ideologies and inspire vigilance against control of Harlem by forces outside the community. The major radical organizations of the late 60’s the Black Panther Party and Young Lords Party, suffered a wave of political repression almost as fierce as what confronted the Communist Party in the post war era and had virtually disappeared from Harlem by the mid 1970’s. Nationalist groups also suffered a decline, as the Nation of Islam split between those, led by Wallace Muhammed, who wanted the organization to embrace Sunni Islam, and those, led by Louis Farrakhan, who wanted to stay true to the Black Supremacist philosophy of the Nation’s founder Elijah Muhammed.
The collapse of that culture left Harlem relatively helpless in the face of an array of tragedies that beset that community from the early 70’s to the mid 90’s, beginning with an arson and abandonment cycle that destroyed much local housing, a city Fiscal Crisis that radically cut social services, especially fire, sanitation and youth programs; and finally a crack epidemic that destroyed families and eroded the neighborhoods sense of safety even as it made fortunes for a small number of high level dealers. By the time the crack epidemic had run its course in the mid 90’s, the community had been politically demobilized to such a degree that it was unable to resist the mass incarceration of large numbers of its youth, and unable to develop a viable opposition to the Guiliani administration’s plan to redevelop Harlem as a potential site of middle class settlement amidst scare Manhattan real estate.
This is not to say that there was no street level resistance in Harlem to strategies of elite control or plans to develop the community in ways that displaced its residents. Street entrepreneurship of various kinds, often pioneered by African immigrants, continued to flourish, even in the face of opposition from local merchants; hip hop jams commanded space in parks and playgrounds even without permits, taking their electricity from the bottom of light poles, and Al Sharpton and other leaders kept the community vigilant in the face of incidents of police brutality in Black neighborhoods and mob attacks on black people in neighborhoods like Bensonhurst and Howard Beach. The Black nationalist tradition was kept alive in portions of hip hop and in movements like Louis Farrkhan’s Million Man March
But the tradition of street oratory which kept Harlemites vigilant on a daily basis to racial and economic injustice was gone for good. There were no more Hubert Harrisons, no more Marcus Garveys, no more Audley Moores, no more Malcolm X’s. There were no Communist street speakers demanding that furniture of evicted families be moved back into vacant apartments; no nationalist orators demanding that Black owned business be given preference over Burger King and Starbucks. And so, a community battered by disinvestment, drug epidemics, mass incarceration, and the collapse of social services, suddenly became, when the economy revived, a hot new neighborhood for the upper middle class, filled with condos, chain stores, and chic cafes.
As working class Harlemites find themselves more and more powerless, doubled up in apartments or forced to move to the Bronx because of rising rents, we need to ask- is a community without street speakers, and street vendors and protest meetings a better place, and if better, better for whom?
Some traditions aren’t missed when they are gone, but if working class people are to have any power in this city, street speaking and street agitation is a tradition that needs to be brought back
Mark Naison
May3, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)