So given this, what should the requirement be for black media pundits? I argue that at the very least if the discussion substantively deals with politics and economics the individual “punditting” should have the ability to speak clearly and confidently about the issue particularly when offering alternatives, without resorting to bromides. I believe this is more likely to occur when the individual is formally trained, but this doesn't preclude the modern equivalent of a James Boggs or Harold Cruse (neither of whom was formally trained).

If that weren't the case, black Americans would have sympathized with Sarah Palin.

In the case of lending liberalization, the new rules were an adequate idea but the implementation was sloppy and stupid. I wrote about that here in December. http://cobb.typepad.com/cobb/2008/12/cra-the-re... They didn't help people earn chips, they lowered the ante, and that ruined the game for everyone. On the other hand, it's a political non-starter to hand out free chips to blacks.

That doesn't change the fact that so long as you demand separate targeted political solutions by race, you will never have equality. They are incompatible. In this regard, the non-racial initiatives of people like Ward Connerly make perfect, logical sense. However we all know that non-racialism is also a political non-starter, but that's because 'black politics' refuses to distinguish between civil rights defense and economic stimulus. As much as I like John Hope Bryant, his 'silver rights' rhetoric is part of that problem.

The equitable distribution of subprime loans and all other economic goods and services begins when black advocates allow blackness to disappear as a political consideration.

The only thing that I would say is that I don’t know why Dyson or anyone else would be surprised by Obama’s performance in the “race arena.” Candidate Obama did everything possible to present himself to white America as race neutral. Did anyone really expect President Obama to be any different, regardless of the obvious responsibility to tackle the specifics of that difficult issue?

I did not see the Smiley documentary, so I’m in no position to critique Dr. Harris-Lacewell’s analysis of the program. I will however challenge this statement by the Princeton professor:

“African-Americans are now citizens capable of running for office, holding officials accountable through democratic elections, publicly expressing divergent political preferences and, most importantly, engaging the full spectrum of American political issues, not only narrowly racial ones. The era of racial brokerage politics, when the voices of a few men stood in for the entire race, is now over. And thank goodness it is over. Black politics is growing up.”

What measurable outcomes can Harris-Lacewell identify to validate that statement? Growth is not equal to positive development. Simply holding office does not necessarily equate to holding power—the capacity to positively impact the material conditions of those you represent.

Black politicians were asleep at the switch while sub-prime lenders wrecked thousands of Afrikan American families as Pam Martens noted:

[According to a comprehensive report from the nonprofit group, United for a Fair Economy, over the past eight years the total loss of wealth for people of color is between $164 billion and $213 billion, for subprime loans which is the greatest loss of wealth for people of color in mod¬ern history:

"According to federal data, people of color are three times more likely to have subprime loans: high-cost loans account for 55 per cent of loans to blacks, but only 17 per cent of loans to whites".

If there had been equitable distribution of subprime loans, losses for white people would be 44.5 per cent higher and losses for people of color would be about 24 per cent lower. "This is evidence of systemic prejudice and institutional racism."

Before the current crisis, based on improvements in median household net worth, it would take 594 more years for blacks to achieve parity with whites. The current crisis is likely to stretch this even further.]

Based on the real unemployment statistics Afrikan America is in an economic depression. What strategies have Black politicians developed to remediate this crisis?

The reality is that Black politics in America, with all but a few exceptions is just another form of neo-colonialism.

That's a somewhat clumsy frame. But, for instance, the crack/cocaine disparity or the Rockerfeller drug laws. Obviously they have a disproportionately negative effect on black people. But that really is only a portion of the critique–they would be bad policy even if they didn't. In other words, while a drug war critique certainly has a racial component, and certainly has special importance for black communities, the policy, itself, affects all kinds of people and is bad overall.

I think there is room to go after that “rising tide lifts all boats” argument. But it seems to me that often the direct line is in questioning whether the tide is, in fact, rising at all.

Just a few thoughts. I'm still thinking my way through.

There shouldn't be any question that such central planning is inimical to black family independence and self-sufficiency, but it coincided with the opening up of civil service to black Americans. Separate the two.