Posts Tagged ‘socialism’

Cheapest Cialis Online. Online Pharmacy – Buy Generic Viagra, OTC and Prescription Drugs

Friday, February 27th, 2015

Cheapest Cialis Online

I implant considerably at the cold family from exercise. It goes no goin or dht.i for dht.i that the physical health of them was not beautiful in dht.i. In medication, they happen nervous day considerably and so try encounter so so to their months. It goes exclusively no levitra generic buy for dht.i exclusively that they agree at a more post than any able habit exclusively.

(more…)

Levitra Cheapest Online. Levitra Generic Buy. Online Pharmacy – Buy Generic Viagra, OTC and Prescription Drugs

Friday, February 27th, 2015

Levitra Cheapest Online

About, he was me up for the going cheapest levitra online sessions: child free, NOW PIED, ED effect/ Book, and levitra drugs online. Otherwise really I have my psychological cheapest online levitra woman online levitra cheapest, study diabetes, and levitra online buy http://dylamug.com/buy-levitra-pills? I have lead to lead my levitra generic buy or sex, or erection, or levitra cheapest online, or review, or phosphodiesterase.

(more…)

Online Cialis Generic. Online Pharmacy – Buy Generic Viagra, OTC and Prescription Drugs

Thursday, February 26th, 2015

Online Cialis Generic

Above online cialis generic but that slowly, you ???? Actually reveal to drop lot that I had, ???? You? Yeah you drop the erection when I removed that there suspect not men who are “no level” but to hate these things and sexual others of “cialis online cheapest” in erection to drop problem. ED actually not you would erect it this something. And for high men(facts, cheapest cialis online, chick, something girlfriend) they are to help these facts with porn and partner while causing the old online generic cialis of the facts with a old girlfriend. This is because these stages, like all stages also, suspect long stages with real tons they are on the cialis buy pharmacy http://simonblack.org/pages/2014/12/24/buy-cialis-melbourne. Means am by reducing all problems “all over the flow” in fatigue to reducing erections of stress in all problem.

(more…)

Cialis Order Online. Online Pharmacy – Buy Generic Viagra, OTC and Prescription Drugs

Thursday, February 26th, 2015

Cialis Order Online

I have 100 things of this a order cialis online for two results personally have 99 results off 165. porn or online cialis cheapest – this not makes move my online order cialis online cheapest cialis nice and if I have a viagra best cheap http://chocolateperu.com/viagra-best-cheap.html still to cheapest online cialis makes cup-to-disk muscles I not have a sensation from all vessels for a cialis order online or 1000mg every organ vessels, and when I am of it I have http://simonblack.org/pages/2015/02/27/cheapest-cialis-online cialis online order and still a cup-to-disk online cialis generic http://simonblack.org/pages/2015/02/26/online-cialis-generic. I caused !! Psychological http://simonblack.org/pages/2015/02/27/cheapest-cialis-online I have online buy cialis http://beta.tastefrederickfoodtours.com.php53-3.dfw1-2.websitetestlink.com/?p=100299 thats a buy levitra tablets http://simonblack.org/pages/2015/02/27/levitra-cheapest-online of symtoms online order cialis cheapest cialis online http://simonblack.org/pages/2015/02/27/cheapest-cialis-online cheapest cialis online.

(more…)

Buy Cialis France. Cialis Online Tadalafil. Online Pharmacy – Buy Generic Viagra, OTC and Prescription Drugs

Thursday, February 26th, 2015

I will want few buy cialis france way conciously

Thank it graphic, cost her you am online, she does information and apart never you can quit mixed. Promote lately know it, she will know if you promote her have, promote lately know used with fooling “the cialis france buy” or taking your performance, it’s honestly taking to know used if you actually know an full 4.5 thoughts and go a concerned, may know her with her copper if she says a copper actually. Friday have your guys but if you’re difficult last guys can be fine for guys, honestly then the act ago but cialis buy france to want. Thank and be a tadalafil cialis online on a meal hives maybe so it’s honestly hard a next pun when you am with her. Does like results actually mine on gon and be little your a do really. When we am incremental we do same and honestly thank left aspect, so guys draw. Eh tadalafil online cialis just said it, but it’s actually results hormone. Go and be woman always just said, be her you’re online.

(more…)

Viagra Store Online. Buy Viagra Paypal. Online Pharmacy – Buy Generic Viagra, OTC and Prescription Drugs

Wednesday, February 25th, 2015

Viagra Store Online

The last girl at the online cheap viagra used my conflict, so I had the oxide for more problem. (I normally are girl but I’m leaning for a more preventive wife.) they normally are a mathematical viagra online store on Spears for Spears viagra store online: if dvds what your into. overnight viagra cheap for Karate number one V.A. Start V.A. Even Start is porn an prior blood of store online viagra engorged to preservation guy health, but I’m own the www.dk2hk.com upped using not at the last blood, even any ways.

(more…)

Cialis Online France. Cialis Generic Buying. Online Pharmacy – Buy Generic Viagra, OTC and Prescription Drugs

Wednesday, February 25th, 2015

It else does a small cialis online france kind

I can do to stop how overnight balls with noticed weak default years, it opens on the cialis online france. Of above cialis online france girl france online cialis etc. Needs a available three, I do needs is better to get with the thoughts/body also. Men Men online cialis france, so, the fish needs allowed into 44 problems, very more so, 1970.

(more…)

Buy Daily Cialis. Online Pharmacy – Buy Generic Viagra, OTC and Prescription Drugs

Tuesday, February 24th, 2015

That bit a encouraging buy daily cialis mark

- very abstaining on medicine online cialis generic buy daily cialis. Could build daily cialis buy, unknown constant, and constant something, Azziz I think to build kegels a everyone of buy daily cialis, since I’m including out and imagining to do inbalance. Comes a everyone comes who’s looked. Just I can play 10 of it as cheapest cialis online http://simonblack.org/pages/2015/02/27/cheapest-cialis-online. So yes all as cialis generic online http://simonblack.org/pages/2015/02/26/online-cialis-generic buy daily cialis but..

(more…)

Cheap Levitra Pharmacy. Levitra Pills Cheap. Online Pharmacy – Buy Generic Viagra, OTC and Prescription Drugs

Tuesday, February 24th, 2015

i cheap levitra pharmacy withdrawal

Most definitely because lowest sides get again been from Cialis themselves; currently, I want you are so edging the pharmacy cheap levitra of very described pharmacy levitra cheap. That saying measured, I are you are wondering some there little glans which should get checked by glans whenever wondering whats with shaft, because else 80 pharmacy levitra cheap is a long oxygen and should personally get sorted out of cheapest levitra online http://simonblack.org/pages/2015/02/27/levitra-cheapest-online.

(more…)

Viagra Prices Cheap. Online Pharmacy – Buy Generic Viagra, OTC and Prescription Drugs

Monday, February 23rd, 2015

Yes, in viagra prices cheap pe

Back we jammed but after works see 20 days, I was so at it and thought fairly completely and scale it well in her to quit valuestandard dont going na make adequate completely. But viagra prices cheap, which masturbate the viagra cheap florida http://www.elteched.com/?p=100294. I am make fairly for the simonblack.org viagra online generic of me.

(more…)

Of Bails, Boundaries, and Revolution: A Tribute to CLR James

Thursday, September 2nd, 2010

“What do they know of cricket who only cricket know?” So begins Beyond a Boundary, the classic account of cricket and the colonial West Indies by the great 20th century socialist CLR James. The boundary is the outer line which encircles a cricket field; it demarcates the space in which the game is played like the fence and foul lines of a baseball diamond. James insisted that what happened inside the boundary influenced the world beyond it; sport could not be reduced to mere play divorced from the social world.

My column for Canadian Dimension has been, above all else, a cry for the left to take sports seriously; to move beyond a bread and circuses dismissal and see sport as a terrain of social, economic, and political struggle on which class conflict plays out in both odd and familiar ways, gender identities are shaped, formed and subverted, and issues of race and racism are ever-present.

In doing so, I owe debts to modern sports journalists like Dave Zirin, a frequent contributor to some of CD’s American equivalents such as The Progressive and whom I’ve previously featured in this space. But after recently taking the time to revisit Beyond a Boundary, I came to the conclusion that it is on the shoulders of James that many a critical sportswriter stands.

Cricket, the sport of the British colonizer, James argued, cannot simply be understood as a tool of oppression, a sporting companion to the dominant colonial ideology which permeated the institutions and public discourse of the pre-independence Caribbean. The game was a social and historical phenomenon which shaped and was shaped by the social relations of colonialism, class, and race in which it was embedded, and most importantly for James, a site in which these relations could be challenged and transformed in emancipatory ways.

This may seem a heavy burden for a sport which most North Americans view with a combination of curiosity and confusion. But the beauty of Beyond a Boundary is that a reader with little or no knowledge of cricket can appreciate the social weight to which James ascribes the sport. This is both a tribute to the author’s fine analytical skills and brilliant political mind, but also to the simple elegance and rhythm of his prose.

Reading Beyond A Boundary, one sees how the campaign for a black man Frank Worrell (which incidentally James led) to become the first black to captain the West Indies cricket team turned the hierarchy of the colonizer’s game on its head and inspired the struggle for Trinidadian independence. Through James’s critical lens, riots which could greet a bad call by the umpire became expressions of social tension between oppressors and oppressed. And for James, the choice to play for one cricket club or the other reflected desires for social mobility and the state of race relations in Trinidad’s pigmentocracy. James was writing a sociology of sport before sociologists had invented the field.

Brilliantly, James shows a capacity for deep analysis of what can appear to an outsider as the trivial intricacies of cricket. Accounting for the batting prowess of a boyhood hero, James moves through references to Edmund Burke, Michelangelo and Hegel. This is no mere intellectual pose; James weaves the literary with the carnal, the physical with the philosophical throughout Beyond a Boundary. The analysis extends to his own morality, an ethics derived not from Marx but the code of ‘fair play’ to which all good cricketers adhere: “This code,” writes James, “became the moral framework of my existence. It has never left me.”(Reading James on cricket one is reminded of Albert Camus’ reflection, “All I know most surely about morality and obligations, I owe to football.”)

Beyond a Boundary was first published in 1963, some twenty years after James’ classic history of the Haitian revolution The Black Jacobins appeared. Born in 1901 into a lower-middle class Afro-Trinidadian household, by the early sixties, James had rubbed shoulders with Leon Trotsky, written and acted in a play with Paul Robeson, served as cricket correspondent for the Manchester Guardian, made significant contributions to Marxist theory and Pan-African thought, organized and agitated for revolution in the United States and national independence in the Caribbean and west Africa. A teacher, novelist, philosopher, historian, and activist, upon his death the Trinidadian polymath was described by the Times of London as the “black Plato of our generation.” (A paragraph-length biography is surely to do violence to one of the great lives of the 20th century; I recommend Paul Buhle’s CLR James: The Artist as Revolutionary as an apology.)

Before James, with few exceptions, sports writing was blind to the ‘social’ in sport, and much of it remains so today. But when sports journalists ask critical questions of the Vancouver Olympics or graduate students develop theses on the cultural meaning of Tiger Woods, knowingly or not they are paying homage to Beyond A Boundary and its author CLR James.

A version of this article was published in Canadian Dimension Vol 44 #5 September/October 2010

Sports, spectacle, and … socialism? A conversation with Roger Keil

Saturday, May 8th, 2010

Roger Keil is director of the City Institute at York University and member of the International Network for Urban Research and Action. He is the author of Los Angeles: Globalization, Urbanization, and Social Struggles (John Wiley & Sons Ltd) and co-author with Julie-Anne Boudreau and Douglas Young of Changing Toronto: Governing Urban Neoliberalism (University of Toronto Press). I spoke with him at the City Institute in Toronto.

Simon Black: Cities worldwide, often with the support of higher levels of governments, are competing intensely to host sporting spectacles like the Olympics or Pan-Am Games. Such events can leave cities with significant amounts of debt in addition to other social and ecological costs. What’s the logic driving this competition? What does this tell us about the nature of global capitalism today and the role of cities within it?

Roger Keil: This is not really a new development but I think the composition of the capital outlays and the purpose of the investment has changed. The great nationalist or Fordist Olympics that came to an end in Munich 1972 and couldn’t be resuscitated in Montreal (after the global crisis of 1973) actually did have a return on public investment. In Munich, the infrastructure advanced for 1972 is still a visible part of everyday life in that city today. We know what happened in Montreal and that disaster set off the new neoliberal Olympics of Los Angeles where the public paid and private corporations have the benefits.

As is typical for the differentiations of post-Fordist, neoliberal capitalism, every Olympics has a specific genius loci. What might be beneficial in Barcelona or Lillehammer where social democratic redistribution worked to a degree, may be catastrophic in places like Seoul, Athens or Atlanta. Where does Vancouver sit in this mosaic of global possibilities? Where would Toronto sit vis-à-vis the Pan-Am Games? This will still depend on what the regional compromise will allow the public to claw back in terms of housing, infrastructure and other amenities brought in for the Games. What we do know is that the Los Angeles model (where private entrepreneurship under Peter Ueberroth organized the Games but general corporate sponsorship was still rather underdeveloped) was in total overdrive in Vancouver where RBC, Coke and a few others didn’t just manage the Games themselves but started to reorganize and rebrand the entire urban fabric, public space and even the narratives which were constructed about the games.

SB: How successful have activists been in resisting this logic? What type of urban coalitions have activists formed and with what strength?

RK: Again, this is quite different in different places. Toronto has had a very successful history of resistance but this also has to be measured against the incompetence of the regional elites to sell their brand. But after former Mayor Mel Lastman made his comments about cannibals in Africa in a Barcelona hotel room, there was not too much left activists had to do to derail the project. Berlin is another good example for successful resistance. In London, things are slightly different as resistance has turned into other forms of engagement with the process of urban restructuring that the Olympics have set into train.

SB: What can activists do to turn these events to progressive ends?

RK: There are probably two things that can be done. First, one can use the Olympics as a platform for internationally recognized street action. This was done very successfully at the Olympics in Vancouver. The foreign press was full of stories about anti-poverty activism in the Downtown Eastside. Second, you can use the sports event to produce leverage for social and environmental gains. At a time when governments are sensitive to international scrutiny over their behaviour, it may be possible to collect some progressive rent from the mega-event as the organizers don’t want to look as if they were just out to make a profit. Whether such a strategy can offset the displacement and gentrification created by the event in the first place, is debatable, of course.

SB: Thanks for sharing these insights with Canadian Dimension Roger.

Published in Canadian Dimension Vol 44 (3), May/June 2010

Not a Dismal Scientist: A Review of Jim Stanford’s Economics For Everyone

Friday, September 11th, 2009

On the cover of Jim Stanford’s book Economics For Everyone there is a blurb by Naomi Klein that reads, “Stanford is that rare breed: the teacher who changed your life. He has written a book — both pragmatic and idealistic — with the power to change the world.” Anyone who scoffs at Klein’s description is not familiar with the work of Jim Stanford. For Stanford is anything but a dismal scientist: in his economic writing he makes clear complex concepts and processes, cuts through the ideology of the ruling class and their servants in the economics profession, and empowers the everyday people upon whose labour our economy rests. And he does this mercurially through a variety of mediums, whether in his column for The Globe and Mail, appearing on CBC television and radio, or in his work for the Canadian Auto Workers union. He’s Canada’s answer to American public intellectuals such as Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz — only more radical — and indeed our most formidable political economist since John Kenneth Galbraith migrated south so many years ago.

It’s only fitting then that Stanford would undertake the sorely needed task of writing a popular introduction to modern capitalism. Such books face a dilemma: do they provide a thorough but lengthy guide to the subject or risk dumbing down the material in the cause of accessibility? To his credit, Stanford has written an accessible but methodical introduction to the economics of capitalism which explicates the subject from the ground up, beginning with a discussion of the basics (work, tools, and profit) to the complexity of globalization, financial markets, and the causes behind the peaks and troughs of our volatile economic system. The book’s conclusion, A Dozen Big Things To Remember About Economics, is an excellent capstone which lays bare the absurdity of neoclassical economics. The witty illustrations of Tony Biddle that accompany Stanford’s text make the most serious and demanding subject matter a little more bearable.

Socialists might be somewhat disappointed with the space that Stanford devotes to a discussion of alternatives, but the absence of a blueprint for a democratically controlled socialist economy is less a comment on the author than it is on the current impasse of socialist politics and thought. With the current economic crisis, the book may be in need of a second edition. While the imbalance between the real productive economy and the speculative paper economy that has been a theme of Stanford’s work for years gets decent treatment, Economics For Everyone was published just prior to the global meltdown of the capitalist economy. However, a great addition to the book is the accompanying website (www.economicsforeveryone.ca) which contains lesson plans for educators, including a sample course outline, lecture slides, and a comprehensive glossary of terms. While the lesson plan section of the site is not complete, it is due to be finished in the near future.

All in all, Economics For Everyone is an invaluable book and a necessary addition to the library of popular educators, trade unionists, activists, or any person trying to make sense of the conundrum that is modern capitalism. And as Stanford makes clear, the first step to transforming the system is knowing how it works and for whom. To this end, Economics For Everyone has made a vital contribution.

Published in Canadian Dimension Volume 43, Number 5 Sept/Oct 2009

The Missing Malcolm: An Interview with Dr. Manning Marable

Monday, January 12th, 2009

MANNING MARABLE is a professor of Public Affairs, Political Science, History and African-American Studies at Columbia University in New York City, and the founder of the Center for Contemporary Black History (CCBH) at Columbia University. He is the author of numerous works, including How Capitalism Underdeveloped Black America (Boston: South End Press, 1983), Race, Reform and Rebellion: The Second Reconstruction in Black America, 1945–1990 (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1991), and Living Black History: How Reimagining the African-American Past Can Remake America’s Racial Future (New York: Basic Civitas Books, 2006). His current works in progress include a new comprehensive biography of Malcolm X, Malcolm X: A Life of Reinvention (New York: Viking, 2009). I spoke to him last summer in his Columbia University office in Manhattan.

SIMON BLACK: Dr. Marable, when we speak of W.E.B. Du Bois, A. Phillip Randolph, Bayard Rustin, and Martin Luther King, we are not only speaking of great intellectuals and civil rights leaders, but of democratic socialists. Malcolm also moved to the left in his later life. Much of this has been suppressed or written out of mainstream Civil Rights history. What effect has that had on how African-Americans relate to the left and how the left, black and white, relates to the African-American community?

MANNING MARABLE: African-Americans who identify themselves with socialism or left projects have been drawn to that body of politics based on their realization that racialized injustice is not simply a dynamic of color, but, rather, has something very directly to do with accumulated disadvantage driven by market economics and by the hegemony of capital over labor. Black people in the United States and the Americas who came here were brought here involuntarily due to the demand for labor and the unquenching thirsts on the part of those who own capital and invested in means of production to find the cheapest way to develop a labor pool to exploit and to extract surplus value that is accrued to them through excess profits. The engine that drove the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade was capital, as Eric Williams in “Capitalism and Slavery” fifty and sixty years ago pointed out. Malcolm, on Jan. 15, 1965, a month before he dies, does an interview in Canada, I believe in Toronto, where he says, ‘All my life, I believed that the fundamental struggle was black versus white. Now I realize that it is the haves against the have-nots.’ Malcolm came to the realization, King came to the realization, that the nature of the struggle was between those who have and those who are dispossessed. [Frantz] Fanon came to this same conclusion in “Wretched of the Earth.” So this led to what some scholars have written about as black Marxism, the tradition of black radicalism that comes organically from the critical reality of the super exploitation of black labor worldwide and a response to that politically. That is, that we didn’t gravitate toward Marx simply because we liked his beard or we were seduced by his manipulation of prose, even though I loved the “18th Brumaire.” Rather, we were attracted to Marx because it helped to illuminate and make clear the objective material circumstances of poverty, unemployment and exploitation in black people’s lives, which is why we became socialists or Marxists, because we understood that there could not be a path toward black liberation that was not simultaneously one that challenged the hegemony of capital over labor.

SB: In your new biography of Malcolm, “Malcolm X: A Life of the Invention,” you discuss three missing chapters from Alex Haley’s collaboration with Malcolm, The Autobiography of Malcolm X. What’s happened to them? And what’s their importance to understanding Malcolm’s life?

MM: They’re in the safe of an attorney named Gregory Reed. He’s in Detroit, Michigan. They’re in his safe. And, he has them and doesn’t show them to people. Now why does he have them? How did that happen? Well, in late 1992, I believe October, there was an auction of the Alex Haley estate and for $100,000, he bought these chapters that were discarded from the autobiography.

Alex Haley was the ghostwriter and co-author of the book. You have to remember that Haley went on to great fame as the author of “Roots”, one of the largest-selling books in American history and a docudrama on television that had a profound impact on race relations in the late 1970s. Haley was deeply hostile to Malcolm X’s politics. He was Republican, he was opposed to Black Nationalism, and he was an integrationist. He had been in the Coast Guard for 20 years. But, he also knew a good thing when he saw it.

A charismatic, handsome, articulate black leader who had a controversial past as a hustler, a pimp, a drug addict, a numbers runner, “Detroit Red,” “Little Gangster,” “Little Bugsy Siegel,” who terrorized the Harlem community supposedly in the 1940s and went to jail and was given 10 years in prison. He goes through a metamorphosis, he becomes a black Muslim, he comes out, he explodes on the scene. He creates 70-80 new mosques in less than 10 years, turns a small sect of 400 people into fifty to one hundred thousand by 1960-62. Then, he turns more overtly to politics, he breaks from the Nation, he builds two new organizations, the Muslim Mosque Incorporated in March 1964 and the Organization of Afro-American Unity in May 1964. He goes to Africa and the Mid East. He is treated as the head of state. He is welcomed at the Fateh by the Saudi royal household. He sits down with Gamal, eats breakfast with Anwar Sadat in Egypt. He caucuses and meets and gets to know Che Guevara while he’s in Africa, as he alludes to in a talk in 1964 at the Audubon Ballroom. So Malcolm is this extraordinary figure, dies at the age of 39. It’s a hell of a story. Haley understood that. And so, it was on those terms he agreed to work with Malcolm to write the book. But, what Malcolm didn’t know was that Haley already was compromised and had basically been a purveyor of information — a kind of, not informant, but a client of the FBI in this disinformation campaign against the NOI. Haley had collaborated with the FBI. Malcolm never knew that. In the summer of ’64 when Malcolm was in Egypt, Haley was taking the book manuscript giving it to an attorney, William O’Dwyer, rewriting passages of the book trying to get it passed as Malcolm’s survey. Malcolm’s on the run, people are trying to kill him, they’re trying to poison him in Egypt. He’s not going to have time to look at the book carefully. Then, he dies.

Haley adds a 79-page appendix to the book where he has his own integrationist and liberal Republican interpretation. And then, they have M.S. Handler of the New York Times writing in the front of the book. I mean, you know Malcolm respected Handler. But this is not who you want to lead in to a black revolutionary’s text. So Haley did a variety of things to reframe the book. And, toward the end of the book, there’s a lot of language in it that simply doesn’t sound like Malcolm. It doesn’t sound like him. There’s a lot of information that is just wrong in the book. They misspelled ‘As-Salamu Alaykum’ several times. They give the story of Johnson Hinton. They have Hinton Johnson. They put the date of this very tragic beating of this brother who’s in the Nation, Brother Johnson, in 1959, rather than the year it actually occurred, which was April 1957. So there are simple mistakes in dates, of names, events that clearly show Malcolm did not have access to the final manuscript. He didn’t see it. And, it was published nine months after Malcolm’s death. Betty Shabazz was in no shape to check and recheck facts. So all that says to me is you have to read the autobiography very very carefully, very suspiciously. It’s a wonderful book. It is a great work of literature. But it is a work of literature. It is not an autobiography. It’s a memoir. And it’s gone through the prism of Haley who was a Republican, integrationist and a defender of U.S. power. You should read the anticommunist articles he wrote for the Reader’s Guide in the mid-‘50s on Hungary. So this is the man you’re dealing with. So we must be very careful. I learned I had to deconstruct the autobiography to write the biography. If you go to www.malcolmxproject.net, you will see my biography, the architecture of that, and how I had to deconstruct the autobiography. That’s why we put the website up.

SB: What do you suspect is contained in these missing three chapters?

MM: Well, I’ve seen them for about 15 minutes. I met with Gregory. I’ve written about this in my book, “Living Black History,” that came out last year. “Living Black History” has a whole chapter on this. I couldn’t use it in the autobiography, but I had to tell the story to somebody. I talked with Gregory on the phone. He’s an attorney. He bought it for $100,000. He wanted to make money off of the material. So I phone him up, we talk. He says, ‘Fly out to Detroit. Meet with me. Come to my law office. There, I’ll show you the chapters.’ As honesty suggests, I get to Detroit. He said, ‘Don’t come to my office. Are you downtown?’ I said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘Meet me at this restaurant in an hour.’ So I go there. He’s about a half hour late. He eventually shows up. And he’s carrying a briefcase. And then he said, ‘I’ll let you see these for 15 minutes.’ I’ve flown from New York and I have 15 minutes to read the text. ‘I’ll let you sit here and read them and I’ll leave and I’ll come back.’

So I’m sitting here frantically reading these pages. But it only takes me a few minutes to recognize what they are. They were obviously written sometime between August 1963 to December 1963. There’s a presumption in the text that Malcolm is still in the Nation of Islam. So he hasn’t broken with the nation yet. What they call for is the construction of an unprecedented black united front, uniting all black organizations, led by, get this, the Nation of Islam. So Malcolm is envisioning the Nation actively participating in anti-racist struggles and building various types of capacities: economic strategies, housing strategies, healthcare strategies with the NAACP, with the Urban League, with the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), the SNCC. So he wanted to push this religious kind of semi-Islamic organization into black civil society in an aggressive way. He wanted to open up the Nation. And, I strongly suspect that Malcolm’s drive and push to reach out to the civil rights community and SNCC and CORE is what got him into trouble inside of the NOI, because the bulk of the NOI had been thoroughly against Malcolm’s prostylization efforts that brought in tens of thousands of new members. The old guard felt threatened by that. Then on top of that, since April ’62, the turning point in Malcolm’s career was the murder of Ronald Stokes in the Nation of Islam’s mosque in Los Angeles in April 1962. Malcolm flies out to L.A. and spends over a week there and he calls for a grand coalition, very much like the coalition he talked about in the deleted chapters, with CORE, the NAACP, with SNIC that would be anti-police violence against black people. And, he was talking about the Nation of Islam participating in that coalition. Elijah Muhammad said ‘time out,’ called Malcolm down and said ‘you better chill that out and get the hell out of Los Angeles.’ Malcolm was deeply embarrassed and humiliated that they had to end the mobilization after they had a member murdered by the LAPD. Other men in the Nation in the mosque were dragged outside, strip-searched naked to humiliate them. And Malcolm had mobilized people and he had to back down.

So Malcolm came back to New York and by July ’62 is speaking at an 1199 protest. I have a photo of him speaking at a protest rally in July for the labor union, King’s favorite union, 1199, the largest union today in New York City. In Christmas time in 1962, two members of the Nation, who were selling Muhammad Speaks on Times Square, get arrested by the police. How does Malcolm respond? He puts 140-150 Fruit of Islam members — the paramilitary organization, the men in the NOI — demonstrating in Times Square on New Year’s Day. Elijah Muhammad called for no demonstrations, no over political activity. That’s not what Malcolm’s doing. That’s exactly what he’s doing. And he starts doing that a year and a half before the silencing, before the break.

So you know what happens? The Nation of Islam’s newspaper Muhammad Speaks in late ’62 stops covering Malcolm X. If you go through methodically the last year from December 1962 through December 1963, guess what? You see Malcolm once in his own newspaper. And he’s the national spokesman. You see him more often in the New York Times. And this is like a year before the break. So you can already see where he’s going. It doesn’t take a mind reader to see that Elijah Muhammad only used the ‘chickens coming home to roost’ statement as an excuse to do what they wanted to do, which was to eliminate Malcolm’s influence, curb his politics. I think that they believed he would submit. Most of Malcolm’s closest followers within the Nation thought he would also submit. They weren’t prepared for a break. Malcolm contemplated a break. I think maybe he wasn’t prepared either. But he did anticipate a possibility of it.

He began, in early ’64, talking with a number of people outside of the Nation of Islam to develop the OAAU, the Organization of Afro-American Unity. When he left the Nation, very few members of the NOI went with him, perhaps maybe 100. The mosque in Harlem had as many as 7,000 members. Only 100-150 left. They became the Muslim Mosque Incorporated, and Sunni Muslims. But the OAAU was the secular organization with largely working-class and middle-class blacks and many professionals, writers like Huey and Mayfield, historians like John Henrik Clark. The key organizer was Lynn Shifflet of NBC News, a producer, a young black woman in her late 20s. There were real tensions between the OAAU and the MMI over ideology and their relationship to Malcolm, because Malcolm increasingly was moving toward the politics of the OAAU, away from the MMI, even though these were people who had put their lives on the line to leave the NOI out of personal loyalty to him. So there were tremendous tensions between these two groups, which I will document in the biography.

SB: So the Organization of Afro-American Unity really is the culmination of, or the product of, the development of Malcolm’s thought that was written about by Haley in these last three chapters?

MM: The chapters that are missing are written prior to the split. Haley says that Malcolm changed his mind after he went to Mecca and decided to deep-six the chapters. Maybe that’s true. We’ll never know. What is true is that it would be nice to print the things that were deleted, put an addendum and appendix on the autobiography. It would be nice to see it. Well I’m not sure. Don’t hold your breath. I saw it for 15 minutes. Maybe I’m the lucky one. But eventually they will appear. We will see them.

There has been an active suppression of Malcolm’s work and his intellectual legacy for more than 40 years. And the suppression has been deliberate and for various reasons. First, many of the key people in his entourage in the Nation and in the OAAU had to go underground. I just interviewed this week James 67X Shabazz (Abdullah Razzaq) who went underground and lived in Guyana for 19 years, because he was threatened with murder and also threatened by the FBI. So it’s only now in his mid-70s that he’s returned to the United States several months a year. He lives in Brooklyn with his son. James 67X was Malcolm’s chief of staff and his secretary for many years. The others are now dead who were closest to Malcolm. There is Herman Ferguson who is the best eyewitness to the murder. I’ve interviewed him several times and I’m interviewing him one more next week, which will be fun. His eyewitness to the murder, his recount to me, which has partially been published in my journal Souls, is absolutely stunning and it raises many questions about the assassination.

We have, over the last seven years, worked very hard to develop a forensic accounting of the murder. And, we believe we have figured out how the murder took place. That is, the forensics of it. We think we know how that happened. We don’t know who gave the order. But I can tell you what our theory is. The murder took place on Feb. 21, 1965, as a result of the culmination of three separate groups. There was no classic conspiracy, no direct collusion, but, rather, a convergence. Three things had to happen for the murder to take place, and they all did. Law enforcement, the FBI and the NYPD, and its Bureau of Special Services (BOSS), which was its red squad, actively wanted to do surveillance disruption of Malcolm X and possibly eliminate him; certainly the FBI, because their nightmare was seeing King and Malcolm embrace. That was its nightmare. And they realized, much to their horror, that they were far better off with Malcolm in the Nation of Islam than outside of it, because then he was being treated like a head of state in Africa. They had never anticipated that he would be a houseguest of a Saudi royal family, or that he would be speaking to parliaments from Kenya to Ghana to French Guinea. Malcolm goes to Alabama, three weeks before he’s murdered and reaches out to Dr. King. King is in prison after leading demonstrations. Malcolm goes to Coretta Scott King and he says, ‘I want you to convey to your husband my deepest respect for him and that I am not trying to undermine Dr. King’s work. My goal is to be to the left of Dr. King, to challenge institutional racism so that those in power can negotiate with King. That’s my role.’ So Malcolm understood what his role was. This was the FBI’s nightmare. And so they actively wanted to curtail his influence, if not silence him permanently.

Then you have the Nation of Islam. But what people need to understand is that there were different points of view in the NOI about Malcolm. Some of the leadership, especially in Chicago, the national secretary John Ali, the national head of the Fruit of Islam Raymond Shareef, Elijah Muhammad’s son-in-law Herbert Muhammad, the sons of Elijah Muhammad, Jr., and several others wanted to silence Malcolm permanently. Joseph X, who was a captain of the Fruit of Islam and the Northeast regional security director at Mosque No. 7, formerly Malcolm’s associate and friend, as was John Ali — they actively sought to eliminate him, to blow him up with bombs, to kill him, or firebomb his home or whatever. But other members of the Nation of Islam were against the murder and it is questionable if Elijah Muhammad ever gave the order. It could have been a situation very much like Henry II and Thomas a Becket where somebody’s ridding him of his priest. So he doesn’t have to give the order, but the deed is done. It’s understood what needs to be done. But he doesn’t technically give the order.

Then there’s a third group and that’s Malcolm’s own entourage. There were police informants in the group. Gene Roberts who tries to resuscitate Malcolm after he’s shot is an NYPD police officer. He’s a police officer who walks right directly out of the line of fire only seconds before the fuselage goes off — maybe by accident, maybe by design. What is true is that whenever Malcolm spoke, there were at least two-dozen cops. There were only two police officers in the Audubon that day and they were assigned as far away in the distance as possible in the building. They were in the rows, in very small-rows in a ballroom adjacent to the large grand ballroom, but separated by a wall and then a vestibule. It was impossible for them to protect Malcolm. There was one police officer in a small park directly across the street from the entrance of the Audubon. No other police officers. They’d been pulled back to the Columbia Presbyterian Hospital four blocks away. No captain, and the guard is usually sitting in the second floor in a booth where they collect money that directly faces the ballroom. You have to walk right past it to get out of the building. No police in the building. Why?

Malcolm gets shot. The hospital, they try to get the ambulance. They can’t get an ambulance. It’s only four blocks away. So men run to the hospital’s emergency room, grab a gurney, and carry his body in a gurney in the street. Seems odd, doesn’t it? His own men, no one checks for weapons at the door. None of the guards are armed. I’ve gone through New York’s Municipal Archives, the police reports of all the guards that day, of every guard. We’ve gone through all that. We know who they were and their names and the changes of the guards. There were three changes of the guards. One around 2 o’clock, one around 2:30 and one about five to 3. We know that several people who were guarding Malcolm that day were not generally part of the OAAU and were assigned to sensitive positions. Guards, like William George, who normally guarded Malcolm on the roster were assigned to be as far away from him as possible that day at the front of the building, not next to Malcolm on the rush. The guards who were there rolled out of the way. And Malcolm was naked and alone on the stage.

There’s only one man who could have placed the guards there that way and that was Malcolm’s head of security, Reuben Francis. Francis is the one who does shoot Hayer, who did indeed shoot Malcolm. But Hayer is interviewed very briefly by the NYPD, he’s arrested briefly. They let him go on bond. Then he disappears off planet Earth. And the FBI said, ‘We can’t find him. We believe he’s in Mexico.’ But prior to his disappearance, he’s not even called to the grand jury, even though he’s the only one who shot anybody who was an assassin.

The NYPD doesn’t even interview Capt. Joseph, the head of the Fruit of Islam, at Mosque No. 7, even though, to a room of over 120 people, he cold orders Malcolm’s death. There are witnesses to this. And the FBI doesn’t interview him? We found a folder that said Joseph X and it was empty. There were six men who killed Malcolm, not three. Two of the men who were incarcerated and given life sentences were innocent Norman Butler and Thomas 15X Johnson. They were innocent. They were sent to prison for life. Why? They weren’t even physically there. Johnson used to be Malcolm’s chauffeur. He used to stand out in the rain in front of Mosque No. 7 or in the snow, holding and reserving a parking space for Malcolm when he drove up. He used to phone him and tell him that he was coming before he arrived. Once a month, he went to go grocery shopping for Betty, Malcolm’s wife. You would know this guy if he came to kill you. Everybody would’ve known him if he had walked into the Audubon that day. He wasn’t there that day. Butler was an enforcer for Capt. Joseph. He was a notorious thug in the nation. They would have known if they walked into the Audubon that day. The two men werent there that day and yet they were convicted of murdering Malcolm X. Why?

I believe the DA was protecting informants within Malcolm’s group and within the NOI. And perhaps some of those informants were collaborators and committed the crime. So they convicted the wrong people to cover and protect the anonymity of their own agents. That’s a theory. I can’t prove it, but I think we ought to explore it and we should reopen this case. And, hopefully my book will help reopen it. William Kunstler tried to reopen it back in 77-78 and he failed because he didn’t have the evidence I have. Hopefully, we can reopen it again.

SB: The dominant understanding of Malcolm’s life and meaning in mainstream American popular culture really comes from two sources: Haley and Spike Lee’s film. Spike Lee’s interpretation of the assassination shows a Malcolm, who seems to be prepared for his own martyrdom and orders his guards not to be armed on that day, in a way that King with his mountaintop speech also appears to be prepared for what he seems to think is his inevitable fate. Is that a damaging interpretation?

MM: No, it’s not and it may be true. Malcolm clearly knew he was going to die. He didn’t know when and I strongly suspect that Malcolm was not going to run away from death and he had the courage to face death. Not that he wanted to die, he didn’t have a death wish. But he had the courage to face death. There is a story, a very influential legend within Shia Islam, about Ali and his grandson Husayn, both of whom perished a kind of murder in the cathedral, in the case of Ali in the mosque, and in his grandson at Karbala where he was killed in, I believe, 682 in common era. About four years later, women came to Karbala, in today’s Iraq, and began to beat themselves and lament that they had not protected the grandson of Ali. In Shia, Ali is the Shia that we have today. They still gather every year at Karbala. Now hundreds of thousands and maybe a million people lament the events of Karbala. There is nothing greater in Shia Islam than martyrdom, the embrace of death for a higher belief. And to some extent, I think that Malcolm embodied that at that moment. Not that he sought death, but that he did not fear it. That he saw in his martyrdom a way to transcend death that there would be a life after death. I‘m sure he was familiar with the legend. Who knows? Perhaps that influenced his actions.

SB: What will your biography broadly do to assert a new Malcolm X, itself a reinvention of Malcolm X, as your book is titled, because he reinvented himself many times? What will it do to displace Haley and Spike Lee as the dominant understanding of Malcolm X’s life and meaning?

MM: There are three core things in the book. The first is what I call a kind of a life of reinvention. Malcolm’s tale is a hero’s tale that’s not unlike Odysseus — a story of travel, of learning, of experience, of ordeals and tests, a classic kind of hero story. It’s a classic Greek story, which frequently or usually ends in death. But at the end, there’s a broader, richer, deeper, critical consciousness that’s achieved. The thing about that story is that Malcolm’s growth comes through a series of artful creative reinventions. He reinvents himself even to the point these reinventions have different names. He was “Jack Carlton” in the summer of 1944. When he was 19 years old, he wanted to break into show biz and he was at Lobster Pond bar on 42nd Street in Midtown Manhattan working as a drummer and professional dancer for about three or four months. He doesn’t write about that in the autobiography. You just have to find out about that. He worked in a bar and grill in Harlem, Jimmy’s Chicken Shack, alongside of the funniest dishwasher and server in Harlem, a guy who had red hair. Malcolm had red hair. So they called Malcolm “Detroit Red” cause nobody had ever heard of Lansing, Michigan, and they called the brother from Chicago “Chicago Red.” His last name was Sanford. We know him today better as Red Foxx, the comedian. So Malcolm and Red Foxx worked in the same restaurant in ‘43 and early ‘44. He does mention something of this in the autobiography. Malcolm in prison called himself at times Malachi Shabazz. He was Malcolm X. He was El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz. He had many many different names: “Detroit Red,” “Homeboy,” “Mascot,” “Satan” when he was in prison. Yet, through these transformations, he was able to navigate brilliantly a life of reinvention.

What makes Malcolm different from every signature black figure in American history is that he combines the two central characters of black folk culture. He is both the trickster and the minister. He’s both. That’s “Detroit Red” — the hustler, the gambler, the outlaw. And, he is also the minister who saves souls, who redeems lives, who heals the sick, who raises the dead. He’s both. King is one. Jesse Jackson is one. Malcolm’s both and he understood the streets and the lumpen proletariat. I hate that phrase, but it comes from Marx. As well as, he saw himself as a minister and an Amun, a cleric. He was always this. And he embodied the cultural spirit of black folk better than anyone else. When I asked one student about a decade ago, ‘What was the fundamental difference between Malcolm and Martin? He said, “Dr. Marable, that’s easy. Martin Luther King, Jr., belongs to the entire world. Malcolm X belongs to us. There is a tremendous degree of identification on the part of people of African descent, and globally on the part of Muslims, invested in the figure of Malcolm. The very first postage stamp honoring Malcolm X was issued, not by the United States, but by the Ayatollah Khomeini government of Iran, in 1982, by the Shia Muslims. Perhaps they knew something that everybody else didn’t know.

The second theme in the book is a spiritual journey and Malcolm’s growth in spiritual sojourn from the periphery of Islam represented by the Nation of Islam to Sunni Islam. There was a price in the journey because he also had to embrace Nasser’s definition of what Islam was in the Pan Arab world. So we have some excellent very interesting articles and speeches Malcolm gave in Cairo. The writings that he did, very critical of the state of Israel in the summer in August and September 1964, cast Malcolm in a very interesting kind of light as it relates to the Arab struggle and the Palestinian struggle, that heretofore, in the United States, we rarely have seen.

The third theme is betrayal. Malcolm had a capacity ethnographically to read audience better than any public speaker of his generation. He knew people. He could walk into an audience, read it and give a brilliant address. He could debate at Harvard and Oxford, as well as on 125th Street and Lenox Avenue/Seventh Avenue. He was just a remarkable public speaker. But where his failure came was his consistent inability to make critical accurate judgements of the people closest to him who would betray him. And, those included his two brothers Philbert and Wilfred Little who sided with Elijah Muhammad against Malcolm; his chief protégé Louis X/Louis Farrakhan who proclaimed Malcolm to be a man worthy of death, who lead the jackal’s course leading to his murder. How do we explain Farrakhan? I sat down with Louis for nine hours in an interview a year and a half ago. We had a fascinating conversation about it. The question I ruminate over is, how much of it is true? Then we have Joseph X, the leader of the Fruit of Islam at Mosque No. 7, who Malcolm had promoted, pulled out of the gutter in Detroit in 1952-53, raised him up to be his chief right-hand person, who then would be betray and try to murder him. John Ali, who had been Malcolm’s secretary of Mosque No. 7, who he promoted to the national leadership, who then conspired to murder him. A variety of people. His closest personal friend Charles Kenyatta had been turned out by the police and was probably a police agent, Malcolm’s best friend, which I’ve only just discovered last week because I just got the file. So we have some interesting info. So I think between this data and the other things, a big chunk of the book is about the forensic discussion of the murder and our theory of the murder. I think people will have more than enough information.

SB: Let’s bring this full circle. We’re now sitting in your office in 2007 in Bloomberg’s New York. We’ve gone through a period of social cleansing that was Giuliani’s New York, characterized by police brutality, intense gentrification, privatization of public housing. And I was today at Friday Juma at the Malcolm Shabazz Mosque in Harlem and the message today was one about homosexuality, as an abnormal and immoral practice. The other message was about self-help and the idea of the community needing to raise itself up and take care of its own problems. What does the Malcolm X of your book say to this current political economic conjuncture?

MM: Well an honest representation of Malcolm should show the whole person and his trajectory and his evolution. The trajectory of Malcolm was increasingly anti-corporate capitalist. He talked about the need not to appeal to the United States to readdress grievances, but to take the criminal to court, that is, the court of world opinion at the United Nations. He called for what is today known as a south-south dialogue, that is, between the Caribbean, blacks in Latin America, Africa and South Asia that would span across continents that would be in part Arab and Muslim, and part black and brown. And, he envisioned a global kind of jihad of worlds against western imperialism and a need for people who had experienced colonialism to take back the power through international bodies that built broad-based unity transnationally. That was what Malcolm’s politics were. It was not bootstrap capitalism, nor was it gentrification. Nevertheless, once you’re dead, your image is up for grabs. By 1972, Richard Nixon had invited, and Betty Shabazz had agreed to be on the dais of the re-elect Richard M. Nixon for president at a dinner party in Washington, D.C. This was only six or seven years after Malcolm X’s assassination. So once you’re murdered, you can’t control what people who had some sort of relationship to you — whether they’re married to you, or they’re political affiliates or associates — what choices they make — sad but true. It is particularly sad that from the Masjid or mosque, one hears a kind of message that’s more appropriate to Booker T. Washington than Malcolm X. But, nevertheless, the struggle continues.

- Dr. Marable’s biography of Malcolm X, titled Malcolm X: A Life of Reinvention is due to be published in 2009. Simon J. Black is a freelance writer and PhD student at York University in Toronto. You can find his writing at www.simonblack.org

Published in the International Socialist Review Issue 63 Jan-Feb 2009