YES!!! My family has been in this country since its founding and in its preceding New England colonies since the 1630s, and of course you are every bit as American! I love that you will not be trolled into silence - you are brave and articulate. Many thanks to FBT!
Outstanding article, M. Wu! Thank You for asking me to join You in "the club of free thinking." Need a lot more 'n the two of us, but it's a start. I look forward to looking at Your website, when time permits, as (anti-) CRT is of special interest to me. Can't TY enough, Ma'am.
I am interested in the things you liked about the interim report, if any. I, too, had many broad criticisms of it, as well as criticisms of a portion of the recommendations. However, a lot of it was focused on particular, verifiable, governmental harms and potential remedies for that. Those sections I had thought were very good and just. I believe that any specific remedies should only go to Black Californians (either themselves or their ancestors) who were harmed by unconstitutional state and local laws and practices. Whether they had been the ancestors of slaves is irrelevant, I think. The relevant thing should be actual harm for themselves or their families because they were Black and a governmental jurisdiction did an unlawful act affecting them or their families. These, by law, should have a financial remedy. And, then, I think we should do the same process for other people - generally of color - who were harmed via unconstitutional laws and regulations. I agree that the sort of universal recommendations that only apply to all Blacks (free school, health care, etc.) are both not justified, politically toxic, and unfair and, as you mention, illegal under the law. However, there are many recommendations - particularly related to prison - that are universal, and I think are necessary reforms for all prisoners. I believe at this point in time, the best thing to do is to very specifically point out the bad and the good in the report directly to the commission, and in the public to push back to the notion that the commission seems to have that it must, essentially, do it all. That will and should have a massive backlash. But, instead, scale back to provable harms, of which there are hundreds of thousands if not millions, and address those. As well, I support reforms that will help ALL struggling Californians, not just Black Californians. As for the damn trolls, yes - do not be silenced. To see the whole report and recommendations, go here: https://oag.ca.gov/ab3121/reports
"I believe at this point in time, the best thing to do is to very specifically point out the bad and the good in the report directly to the commission...I support reforms that will help ALL struggling Californians."
Thank you for this thoughtful comment and for your advocacy of a universalist approach!
If people can point to particular unjust laws that affected their particular families then legal redress is justified--and that applies to all people, regardless of their race. But applying redress to people simply because they belong to a particular race is unjust. I wasn’t born in California. Neither was my dad. We didn’t move here until 1982. What does California’s laws before 1982 have to do with us? Just because some black people were harmed by laws in California should have no relevance to whether all black people should have right to redress.
I agree that a scientific and empirical analysis of the report, beyond the area of higher education which I addressed in the MTC opinion piece, is warranted. Aside from the substantive and methodological issues, the report in my humble opinion suffers from a lack of intellectual objectivity. For instance, on redlining, the Task Force quoted from Richard Rothstein's 2017 book The Color of Law, yet did not discuss the book's direct critique, such as Richard Sander's Moving Toward Integration: The Past and Future of Fair Housing. It almost seems to me that the authors selected the cases by the dependent variable, or their predetermined line of reasoning that irrefutable institutional racism permeates both California and the nation at large to explain discrepancies. This is an ideological premise that I disagree with.
On the legal system section, while criminal justice reforms are a much-debated topic in its own right, infusing broad policy positions for policing and the prison system into reparations is more ideological grafting than subject-matter discussion.
When it comes to matters of racism there is little intellectual objectivity or integrity to be found in those who are currently most outspoken about the subject and have a platform to speak about it. It is a domain mostly driven by opportunists and ideologues. When we have the party that once fought a war for slavery advocating for a commission on the history of injustice toward black people, and that party does not include on its own website’s timeline it’s war for slavery and claims it was fighting for civil rights for 200 years, there is little hope that objectivity is going to exist in the outcome of that commission.
The primary function of the commission is political marketing. Not the search for justice or truth. Until obvious lies are acknowledged, we can be confident that will be the function of all commissions on historical racial injustice.
Re the criminal justice reform section. The fact is that I support many of the recommendations but it is - you are right - something that is really not best addressed in the forum of reparations. For the report to get wide support, they absolutely need to narrow the recommendations to remedies for clear anti-Black or racist laws and regulations that caused identifiable harm to individuals, families and their heirs. And that they - and only they - receive remedies. California cannot be responsible for what was done nationally or during slavery – California wasn't even a slave territory or state – or for the racism that permeated society at large for much of California's history. I believe that we as a state should be responsible for any identifiable harms to Blacks (and others) that were clearly contrary to the 14th amendment (Plessy v. Ferguson notwithstanding). If the committee makes its recommendations too broadly, the effort will fail spectacularly and rightly. And it will do well more harm than good.
You are certainly right. When California joined the Union as a free state in 1850, the state constitution contained an anti-slavery clause. But the report is also not wrong in asserting that slavery and racist mentalities permeated the state's early policies and institutions. It is complicated.
The Task Force is expected to publish its final findings next July. I will continue to monitor the process. A compelling government interest in remedying significant historical wrongs has often been invoked in legal (SCOTUS) justifications of race consciousness. But the interest must be strictly scrutinized and narrowly tailored. I believe the same doctrine of strict scrutiny shall apply in this area.
When I grew up in Brooklyn, still living in the projects, my father played this ballad. Paul Robeson was my North Star in grappling with what it means to be an American. And this was sung in 1939 at both the Republican and Communist National Conventions. Hard to figure out today and times past, but worth reflecting on:
Hi Joe, my favorite line from the song: "What's your name, Buddy? Where you goin'? Who are you? Well, I'm the everybody who's nobody, I'm the nobody who's everybody."
I find most of the commentary on Free Black Thought to be insightful and provocative. However, recently postings are tending toward CONSERVATIVE Black Thought, or simply conservative thought in general. This posting is by an individual with a publicly and organizationally set ideology. The alarm bells in my mind ring loudly whenever an “opinion” piece is written by someone whose views are predetermined. Free Black Thought is essential. Let it be free, and Black whenever possible.
What do you define as "conservative thought"? Personally, I'm quite happy with the variety of viewpoints it provides, from black people and people who are not. While I think it makes sense to provide a platform for mostly black writers, given its name, I don't think there is a fundamental problem with occasionally providing relevant material by people who are not black. This particular piece was definitely an example of that. How did you determine that Wenyuan has a "set ideology"? Could you give an example of an author who you appreciate that does not have a "set ideology" and why you think that author does not have one?
If you find the viewpoints of black people presented here aren't to your liking, I suspect you could find the viewpoints you are seeking from the legacy, billionaire owned outlets such as the Washington Post. I think they generally describe themselves as "liberal" -- whatever that means these days.
I support the sentiments you expressed here. I find the Democratic Party’s demagoguery around race to be appalling. It’s egregiously bad here in California. The hypocrisy is disgusting. The Democratic Party is looking for scapegoats for their own legacy of slavery, and using the legacy of slavery for its own political power. It’s disgusting. It wasn’t enough it fought a war to keep my ancestors enslaved, now it wants to pretend it has my interests in mind when spreading racial tribalism.
The only reparations left owed to descendants of American slaves are owed by the Democratic Party itself. That is what needs to sink into the consciousness of Americans. Democrats need to take responsibility for being loyal to a party that fought a war for slavery and nursed a white Supremacist terrorist organization. And stop it from forcing innocent people to pay for the history of its crimes. The Democratic Party is so eager to use tax money to pay for the reparations it owes, but completely apathetic about dipping into the enormous wealth it possesses and has access to.
I would very much appreciate if Free Black Thought published my essay on the Democratic Party and its denial of its legacy of slavery. I think it is quite relevant to the topic you brought up here.
Thank you so much, Wenyuan Wu, for your courage and thoughtfulness in articulating your position. And thank you so much, Journal of Free Black Thought, for providing this forum for what strikes me as a reasonable, thoughtful, and intellectually-diverse airing of views. I am not a Californian, although I once was, so at one level I don't have stake in this debate. But it strikes me that this is an early version of a debate that will play out in other states, as well. I think we need people like Wu who will critique analyses and premises for policy interventions in exactly this kind of thoughtful and methodologically sophisticated way. And we will need people like Robin McDuff who recognize the validity of some critiques, while also advocating for some kind of thoughtfully-implemented reparations policy. I don't think the debate can be genuinely thoughtful or successful if it is premised on the kinds of simplistic notions of systemic racism and white supremacy that are so popular at the moment. But hopefully with the kind of courageous pushback that Wu is offering we can move to a more nuanced and careful discussion, which is surely necessary. Thank you for facilitating this discussion!
Wenyuan, you don't have to prove anything to anybody. You could have been given the naturalization certificate yesterday for all that matters, and still not be required to "prove your americanness". The backlash against you is yet another argument against any race-based policy: people who have been racialized can be racist themselves; the well has already been poisoned, se we better move on and find alternative ways to get out of this terrible situation.
Wenyuan Wu, I applaud your post and service to the USA.
Wenyuan Wu and "Free Black Thought", one of the USA's great strenghts since 1789 is that that the USA didn't have market dominant minorities, unlike most other countries.
Are you afraid that California is starting to develop market dominant minorities (immigrants and ethnics)? Can this fate be avoided? If so, how?
Or does California need to learn to live with market dominant minorities over the long run?
Why in your view have the socio-economic gaps between ADOS and non ADOS Californians widened in recent decades? What if anything do you think can be done about it?
Should any and all special assistance only go to ADOS and not to non ADOS of African ancestry?
YES!!! My family has been in this country since its founding and in its preceding New England colonies since the 1630s, and of course you are every bit as American! I love that you will not be trolled into silence - you are brave and articulate. Many thanks to FBT!
Outstanding article, M. Wu! Thank You for asking me to join You in "the club of free thinking." Need a lot more 'n the two of us, but it's a start. I look forward to looking at Your website, when time permits, as (anti-) CRT is of special interest to me. Can't TY enough, Ma'am.
Brave and brilliant, well-argued and fully compassionate towards all of us.
No American should have to suffer this racist abuse.
I am interested in the things you liked about the interim report, if any. I, too, had many broad criticisms of it, as well as criticisms of a portion of the recommendations. However, a lot of it was focused on particular, verifiable, governmental harms and potential remedies for that. Those sections I had thought were very good and just. I believe that any specific remedies should only go to Black Californians (either themselves or their ancestors) who were harmed by unconstitutional state and local laws and practices. Whether they had been the ancestors of slaves is irrelevant, I think. The relevant thing should be actual harm for themselves or their families because they were Black and a governmental jurisdiction did an unlawful act affecting them or their families. These, by law, should have a financial remedy. And, then, I think we should do the same process for other people - generally of color - who were harmed via unconstitutional laws and regulations. I agree that the sort of universal recommendations that only apply to all Blacks (free school, health care, etc.) are both not justified, politically toxic, and unfair and, as you mention, illegal under the law. However, there are many recommendations - particularly related to prison - that are universal, and I think are necessary reforms for all prisoners. I believe at this point in time, the best thing to do is to very specifically point out the bad and the good in the report directly to the commission, and in the public to push back to the notion that the commission seems to have that it must, essentially, do it all. That will and should have a massive backlash. But, instead, scale back to provable harms, of which there are hundreds of thousands if not millions, and address those. As well, I support reforms that will help ALL struggling Californians, not just Black Californians. As for the damn trolls, yes - do not be silenced. To see the whole report and recommendations, go here: https://oag.ca.gov/ab3121/reports
"I believe at this point in time, the best thing to do is to very specifically point out the bad and the good in the report directly to the commission...I support reforms that will help ALL struggling Californians."
Thank you for this thoughtful comment and for your advocacy of a universalist approach!
If people can point to particular unjust laws that affected their particular families then legal redress is justified--and that applies to all people, regardless of their race. But applying redress to people simply because they belong to a particular race is unjust. I wasn’t born in California. Neither was my dad. We didn’t move here until 1982. What does California’s laws before 1982 have to do with us? Just because some black people were harmed by laws in California should have no relevance to whether all black people should have right to redress.
I agree that a scientific and empirical analysis of the report, beyond the area of higher education which I addressed in the MTC opinion piece, is warranted. Aside from the substantive and methodological issues, the report in my humble opinion suffers from a lack of intellectual objectivity. For instance, on redlining, the Task Force quoted from Richard Rothstein's 2017 book The Color of Law, yet did not discuss the book's direct critique, such as Richard Sander's Moving Toward Integration: The Past and Future of Fair Housing. It almost seems to me that the authors selected the cases by the dependent variable, or their predetermined line of reasoning that irrefutable institutional racism permeates both California and the nation at large to explain discrepancies. This is an ideological premise that I disagree with.
On the legal system section, while criminal justice reforms are a much-debated topic in its own right, infusing broad policy positions for policing and the prison system into reparations is more ideological grafting than subject-matter discussion.
When it comes to matters of racism there is little intellectual objectivity or integrity to be found in those who are currently most outspoken about the subject and have a platform to speak about it. It is a domain mostly driven by opportunists and ideologues. When we have the party that once fought a war for slavery advocating for a commission on the history of injustice toward black people, and that party does not include on its own website’s timeline it’s war for slavery and claims it was fighting for civil rights for 200 years, there is little hope that objectivity is going to exist in the outcome of that commission.
The primary function of the commission is political marketing. Not the search for justice or truth. Until obvious lies are acknowledged, we can be confident that will be the function of all commissions on historical racial injustice.
Re the criminal justice reform section. The fact is that I support many of the recommendations but it is - you are right - something that is really not best addressed in the forum of reparations. For the report to get wide support, they absolutely need to narrow the recommendations to remedies for clear anti-Black or racist laws and regulations that caused identifiable harm to individuals, families and their heirs. And that they - and only they - receive remedies. California cannot be responsible for what was done nationally or during slavery – California wasn't even a slave territory or state – or for the racism that permeated society at large for much of California's history. I believe that we as a state should be responsible for any identifiable harms to Blacks (and others) that were clearly contrary to the 14th amendment (Plessy v. Ferguson notwithstanding). If the committee makes its recommendations too broadly, the effort will fail spectacularly and rightly. And it will do well more harm than good.
You are certainly right. When California joined the Union as a free state in 1850, the state constitution contained an anti-slavery clause. But the report is also not wrong in asserting that slavery and racist mentalities permeated the state's early policies and institutions. It is complicated.
The Task Force is expected to publish its final findings next July. I will continue to monitor the process. A compelling government interest in remedying significant historical wrongs has often been invoked in legal (SCOTUS) justifications of race consciousness. But the interest must be strictly scrutinized and narrowly tailored. I believe the same doctrine of strict scrutiny shall apply in this area.
I wrote below a little - yes, I agree.
Oh, and I should mention I generally agree with much of your sentiment.
When I grew up in Brooklyn, still living in the projects, my father played this ballad. Paul Robeson was my North Star in grappling with what it means to be an American. And this was sung in 1939 at both the Republican and Communist National Conventions. Hard to figure out today and times past, but worth reflecting on:
Ballad for Americans
https://youtu.be/LHCQGQdeL68
FBT sings this challenge as well.
Thanks for sharing your story and this song! Fabulous.
Hi Joe, my favorite line from the song: "What's your name, Buddy? Where you goin'? Who are you? Well, I'm the everybody who's nobody, I'm the nobody who's everybody."
I find most of the commentary on Free Black Thought to be insightful and provocative. However, recently postings are tending toward CONSERVATIVE Black Thought, or simply conservative thought in general. This posting is by an individual with a publicly and organizationally set ideology. The alarm bells in my mind ring loudly whenever an “opinion” piece is written by someone whose views are predetermined. Free Black Thought is essential. Let it be free, and Black whenever possible.
Thank you for your support! We strive to represent a wide variety of viewpoints. We thought Wenyuan's piece was important and deserved an airing.
What do you define as "conservative thought"? Personally, I'm quite happy with the variety of viewpoints it provides, from black people and people who are not. While I think it makes sense to provide a platform for mostly black writers, given its name, I don't think there is a fundamental problem with occasionally providing relevant material by people who are not black. This particular piece was definitely an example of that. How did you determine that Wenyuan has a "set ideology"? Could you give an example of an author who you appreciate that does not have a "set ideology" and why you think that author does not have one?
If you find the viewpoints of black people presented here aren't to your liking, I suspect you could find the viewpoints you are seeking from the legacy, billionaire owned outlets such as the Washington Post. I think they generally describe themselves as "liberal" -- whatever that means these days.
That was maybe the best essay I've read on the subject. Thank you.
I support the sentiments you expressed here. I find the Democratic Party’s demagoguery around race to be appalling. It’s egregiously bad here in California. The hypocrisy is disgusting. The Democratic Party is looking for scapegoats for their own legacy of slavery, and using the legacy of slavery for its own political power. It’s disgusting. It wasn’t enough it fought a war to keep my ancestors enslaved, now it wants to pretend it has my interests in mind when spreading racial tribalism.
The only reparations left owed to descendants of American slaves are owed by the Democratic Party itself. That is what needs to sink into the consciousness of Americans. Democrats need to take responsibility for being loyal to a party that fought a war for slavery and nursed a white Supremacist terrorist organization. And stop it from forcing innocent people to pay for the history of its crimes. The Democratic Party is so eager to use tax money to pay for the reparations it owes, but completely apathetic about dipping into the enormous wealth it possesses and has access to.
I would very much appreciate if Free Black Thought published my essay on the Democratic Party and its denial of its legacy of slavery. I think it is quite relevant to the topic you brought up here.
https://minorityreport.substack.com/p/accepting-the-obvious
It switched up. Did you not notice?
You are a great American. Thanks for sharing your story and your courage to stand.
A fantastic and timely article that articulates the damage that Wokeism is doing to our sense of community.
Thank you so much, Wenyuan Wu, for your courage and thoughtfulness in articulating your position. And thank you so much, Journal of Free Black Thought, for providing this forum for what strikes me as a reasonable, thoughtful, and intellectually-diverse airing of views. I am not a Californian, although I once was, so at one level I don't have stake in this debate. But it strikes me that this is an early version of a debate that will play out in other states, as well. I think we need people like Wu who will critique analyses and premises for policy interventions in exactly this kind of thoughtful and methodologically sophisticated way. And we will need people like Robin McDuff who recognize the validity of some critiques, while also advocating for some kind of thoughtfully-implemented reparations policy. I don't think the debate can be genuinely thoughtful or successful if it is premised on the kinds of simplistic notions of systemic racism and white supremacy that are so popular at the moment. But hopefully with the kind of courageous pushback that Wu is offering we can move to a more nuanced and careful discussion, which is surely necessary. Thank you for facilitating this discussion!
Wenyuan, you don't have to prove anything to anybody. You could have been given the naturalization certificate yesterday for all that matters, and still not be required to "prove your americanness". The backlash against you is yet another argument against any race-based policy: people who have been racialized can be racist themselves; the well has already been poisoned, se we better move on and find alternative ways to get out of this terrible situation.
Wenyuan Wu, I applaud your post and service to the USA.
Wenyuan Wu and "Free Black Thought", one of the USA's great strenghts since 1789 is that that the USA didn't have market dominant minorities, unlike most other countries.
Are you afraid that California is starting to develop market dominant minorities (immigrants and ethnics)? Can this fate be avoided? If so, how?
Or does California need to learn to live with market dominant minorities over the long run?
Why in your view have the socio-economic gaps between ADOS and non ADOS Californians widened in recent decades? What if anything do you think can be done about it?
Should any and all special assistance only go to ADOS and not to non ADOS of African ancestry?