Home Blog Page 49

Kamala Harris’s 107 Days: Inside Her Anger at Biden, Frustration With Democrats, and the Risk She Wouldn’t Take

DAMON K JONES
-
0
Kamala Harris’s 107 Days: Inside Her Anger at Biden, Frustration With Democrats, and the Risk She Wouldn’t Take

Kamala Harris’s new memoir, 107 Days, has landed like a political thunderclap. Published September 23, 2025, by Simon & Schuster, the book chronicles her short-lived presidential campaign against Donald Trump after Joe Biden’s withdrawal. But more than just a campaign diary, it reads as a reckoning—an unfiltered airing of grievances about Biden, his inner circle, and the broader Democratic Party.

Anger at Biden: “Recklessness” and Betrayal

Harris spares no words in describing her anger and disappointment with Joe Biden. She calls his decision to delay dropping out of the 2024 race an act of “recklessness,” arguing that it left her with too little time—just 107 days—to build a campaign that could compete with Trump.

She accuses Biden’s team of undercutting her directly by feeding or tolerating negative stories about her office being “chaotic” or suffering from staff turnover. In her telling, Biden’s aides adopted a zero-sum mentality: “If she’s shining, he’s dimmed.”

Harris even recounts a tense phone call before a major debate, where Biden accused her of bad-mouthing him to party powerbrokers. She describes the timing as “bewildering and destabilizing”—a needless confrontation at a critical moment.

On foreign policy, Harris condemns Biden’s lack of empathy for Palestinians during the Gaza war, contrasting it with his highly visible support for Ukraine. “It wasn’t just about foreign policy,” she writes. “It was about whether our values were real or rhetorical.”

Democratic Leadership: Loyalty Demanded, Support Withheld

Harris also takes aim at the wider Democratic establishment. She claims that party insiders treated her candidacy as “Biden’s leftovers” instead of rallying behind her as a serious contender.

She writes that Barack Obama withheld his full endorsement until too late, framing his support as more symbolic than strategic. She argues that Democratic leaders—including those in Congress—were more concerned with preserving their own standing than backing her with real political capital.

Harris singles out the overwhelming influence of pro-Israel voices within the party, saying they pressured her to soften her critiques of U.S. policy in Gaza. To her, this was another example of how Democrats demanded silence on issues of principle in exchange for party unity.

The Pete Buttigieg Decision

Perhaps the most headline-grabbing admission is her revelation that Pete Buttigieg was her first choice for vice president. She describes him as “an ideal partner,” but ultimately judged the ticket too risky:

“He would have been an ideal partner—if I were a straight white man.”

Harris reasoned that a ticket combining a Black woman and an openly gay man might be too much for voters to accept with only 107 days to campaign. She admits that part of her wanted to “just do it,” but she ultimately chose caution, describing the decision as one made with “mutual sadness.”

Her comments triggered backlash, prompting Harris to clarify in interviews that she did not reject Buttigieg because of his sexuality, but because of the high stakes and short timeline. Still, Buttigieg expressed surprise, saying the issue had never come up in their private conversations.

Missteps, Grief, and the Human Cost

Harris does not deny her own missteps. She points to her disastrous appearance on The View, where she said she “couldn’t think of anything” that separated her from Biden, as a turning point that weakened her candidacy.

She describes the loss as “traumatic,” comparing it to the grief she felt after her mother’s death. Her husband, Doug Emhoff, emerges as a quiet protector, shielding her from internal polling that showed the campaign collapsing.

Reception: Finger-Pointing or Truth-Telling?

Reaction to 107 Days has been sharply divided. Some praise Harris’s candor in exposing the dysfunction within Democratic leadership. Others accuse her of deflecting blame and deepening party fractures. Commentators like Stephen A. Smith dismissed the memoir entirely, sneering: “Who cares?”

But regardless of whether it rehabilitates her image or worsens perceptions, the book leaves no doubt: Harris believes her campaign was undermined as much by her own party as by Trump. In her eyes, Biden’s recklessness, party insiders’ disloyalty, and the crushing weight of political calculation combined to doom her historic candidacy.

INDONESIA PLEDGES 20K TROOPS TO GAZA TO DEFEND PALESTINIANS FROM NETANYAHU

DAMON K JONES
-
0
INDONESIA PLEDGES 20K TROOPS TO GAZA TO DEFEND PALESTINIANS FROM NETANYAHU

United Nations, New York — In one of the most powerful speeches delivered at the UN General Assembly in recent memory, Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto declared that his country is prepared to send 20,000 or more troopsto Gaza. The move, he said, would be part of a mission to secure peace and protect Palestinians from ongoing violence and oppression under Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.

“If and when the United Nations Security Council and this great assembly decide, Indonesia is prepared to deploy 20,000 or even more of our sons and daughters to help secure peace in Gaza,” Prabowo told world leaders. His words drew vigorous applause, signaling Indonesia’s readiness to match its diplomatic stance with boots on the ground.

Prabowo grounded his pledge in Indonesia’s own history of colonialism, exploitation, and apartheid conditions under Dutch rule. “We Indonesians know what it means to be denied justice and what it means to live in poverty and apartheid,” he said. That struggle, he argued, ties Indonesia’s destiny to that of the Palestinians, who today face displacement, starvation, and relentless bombardment. The president reminded the Assembly that Indonesia’s independence was recognized and supported through the UN. Just as global solidarity lifted Indonesia out of oppression, he said, the world now has a moral duty to do the same for Palestine.

Indonesia is already one of the most significant contributors to UN peacekeeping forces, with thousands of its soldiers serving worldwide. However, Prabowo made it clear that this offer goes far beyond mere symbolic rhetoric. “We will continue to serve where peace needs guardians, not with just words, but with boots on the ground,” he said. In addition to manpower, Indonesia also pledged to provide financial support for peace operations, while announcing increased humanitarian aid, including rice shipments to feed starving Palestinians in Gaza.

While the headline-grabbing pledge focused on defending Palestinians, Prabowo also emphasized Indonesia’s commitment to a two-state solution and security guarantees for both peoples. “We must have an independent Palestine,” he declared, before adding: “But we must also guarantee the safety and security of Israel. Only then can we have real peace.” This balancing act highlights Indonesia’s approach: strong support for Palestinian rights, but within a framework that seeks reconciliation rather than endless war.

Indonesia is the world’s largest Muslim-majority nation, with a population of nearly 280 million. A troop commitment of this scale would mark one of the most significant international interventions in Gaza’s history — but only if the UN authorizes it. For Palestinians, the pledge represents a rare moment when a major nation has gone beyond empty statements and offered real, enforceable solidarity. For Netanyahu’s government, it signals growing global pressure and a potential shift in the international opinion balance.

Indonesia has drawn a clear line: if the UN acts, it will lead. By pledging 20,000 troops for Gaza, Jakarta is not only defending Palestinians but also challenging a world order where, as Prabowo put it, “the strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must.” Whether the UN Security Council follows through remains to be seen. But one thing is certain — the call for justice in Palestine is no longer just words.

Autism, The Politics of Health, and the Questions No One Wants to Answer

DAMON K JONES
-
0
Autism, The Politics of Health, and the Questions No One Wants to Answer

When Donald Trump warned against Tylenol use during pregnancy, critics called it reckless. When Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. followed with a sweeping statement about “turning over every stone” from pharmaceuticals to toxic exposures, the outrage doubled. The medical establishment quickly reassured the public that acetaminophen is safe. Yet Kennedy’s speech marked a turning point: for the first time in decades, the federal government admitted it is willing to study all potential causes of autism — including the ones once considered politically off-limits. “Historically, NIH has focused almost solely on politically safe and entirely fruitless research about the genetic drivers of autism,” Kennedy said. “That would be like studying the genetic drivers of lung cancer without looking at cigarettes.” The FDA has now announced it will place warning labels on acetaminophen for pregnant women, advise the lowest-dose use, and fund further research into possible links with autism and ADHD. Kennedy also pointed to folate deficiency and potential therapies, such as leucovorin, as areas of promise. And, most controversial, he stated that vaccines — long considered untouchable — are now under examination.


What’s missing from the headlines is the question that both Trump and Kennedy dared to ask: Why is autism so much more prevalent today than it was in the past? The familiar answer — that we are just “better at diagnosing” — does not hold up under scrutiny. In the 1970s, autism was considered rare. Today, it affects 1 in 36 children nationwide. Awareness alone cannot account for such a dramatic increase. And the rise is not distributed evenly. According to CDC surveillance data, Black children are now diagnosed at rates as high or higher than White children — about 1 in 27 Black 8-year-olds. That’s a reversal from decades ago, when Black children were systematically underdiagnosed.

Another disparity emerges: Black children with autism are more likely to also have intellectual disability compared to their White peers. This means many cases are only recognized when symptoms are severe, leaving milder forms undetected for years. Delayed diagnoses translate into delayed interventions, compounding challenges for families. So even as the statistics “catch up,” the outcomes do not. In Sowell’s language, this is a failure of results over rhetoric — one more example where institutions congratulate themselves on equity while families face harsher realities.


What medical experts avoid addressing is the possibility that autism’s rise is not driven by a single cause but by a combination of factors. The vaccine debate has long been declared “settled,” and now acetaminophen is brushed off as “unproven.” But what if the truth is not either/or, but both/and? What if autism stems from an interplay of vaccines, common pharmaceuticals like Tylenol, environmental toxins, and nutritional deficiencies? To dismiss that possibility outright is not science but politics. The health care system must shift its focus from protecting narratives to examining outcomes. The outcome is clear: autism diagnoses are dramatically higher than in the 1970s, and Black children face disproportionate rates with more severe complications. Numbers don’t lie — and until those numbers are confronted, the establishment has no excuse for refusing to ask the hard questions.


Instead of engaging Kennedy’s announcement on its merits, the political class resorted to outrage. Critics labeled it pseudoscience. Yet the new approach — breaking down silos between NIH, FDA, CDC, and CMS — is precisely what many families have demanded for decades: research without taboos. Even if Kennedy is incorrect about some exposures, his broader point remains valid. For too long, research has been confined to politically safe areas, overlooking environmental and pharmaceutical opportunities.


Meanwhile, the numbers kept climbing. Families — especially in Black communities with fewer resources and later diagnoses — deserve answers, not dismissals. Sowell often reminded us: “When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear.” The truth is, autism is more prevalent today than in any previous generation. The truth is Black Americans are disproportionately affected by late detection and higher severity. And the truth is, our institutions have failed to produce answers while hiding behind politically convenient science.


No one is suggesting parents abandon medicine overnight. But the refusal to ask hard questions has left families in the dark. If Kennedy’s initiative finally forces a complete, unbiased examination of all causes — genetic, pharmaceutical, environmental, and beyond — it will do more for children than decades of bureaucratic reassurance. Autism is a complex disorder, but complexity is no excuse for inaction. Until our institutions deliver honest answers, the rise in prevalence — especially among Black children — will remain a national crisis hiding in plain sight.

Woman’s Body Found in Abandoned Mount Vernon House Under Investigation

DAMON K JONES
-
0
Woman’s Body Found in Abandoned Mount Vernon House Under Investigation

Mount Vernon, NY — Authorities are investigating after a woman’s body was discovered inside an abandoned house on Beekman Avenue in Mount Vernon.

Police say the call came in shortly after midday when a worker inspecting the foreclosed property made the discovery. Responding officers secured the scene, and biohazard crews were brought in due to the condition of the remains.

The body was removed and taken to the Westchester County Medical Examiner’s Office, where officials will determine the woman’s identity and the cause of death. At this time, investigators say they do not believe foul play is involved, though the case remains under investigation.

The Mount Vernon Police Department is asking anyone with information to come forward. Tips can be submitted anonymously by texting “MVPD” and your message to 847411, or by calling the Detective Division directly at 914-665-2510.

Black Westchester will provide updates as more information becomes available.

Black Westchester Magazine – October 2025 Issue

DAMON K JONES
-
0
Black Westchester Magazine – October 2025 Issue

The October 2025 issue of Black Westchester Magazine delivers hard-hitting journalism and unapologetic commentary on the issues shaping Black America today. From local Westchester politics to national policy debates, this edition shines a light on the intersections of race, power, and accountability that mainstream media often ignores.

Inside, readers will find investigative reports exposing the hidden forces influencing our communities, in-depth features on health and wellness, and bold op-eds calling for political clarity and economic sovereignty. We highlight voices that challenge the status quo, honor those building institutions of empowerment, and confront the failures of leadership—both locally and nationally.

More than a magazine, Black Westchester continues its mission: informing, educating, and mobilizing our community for real change. The October issue is not just about what’s happening—it’s about what must be done.

60 Years After the Moynihan Report: The Black Family, Cultural Decline, and Dependency

DAMON K JONES
-
0
60 Years After the Moynihan Report: The Black Family, Cultural Decline, and Dependency

When Daniel Patrick Moynihan released his report in 1965, he was immediately condemned as a racist. Black leaders, activists, and preachers accused him of attacking his own community by pointing out that the rise of fatherless homes posed a greater threat to Black progress than racism itself. At the time, the out-of-wedlock birth rate among Black Americans stood at 25 percent. Today it has climbed past 70 percent. The voices that once drowned Moynihan out with charges of racism are silent now that the problem has grown nearly three times worse.


This silence is not accidental—it is convenient. In the decades since Moynihan’s warning, civil rights laws outlawed formal discrimination, affirmative action policies expanded access to schools and jobs, and trillions of dollars in anti-poverty programs poured into Black communities. The promise was that these measures would close gaps, uplift families, and finally break the cycle of generational poverty. Yet the outcome is undeniable: the family, the very cornerstone of stability, has grown weaker, not stronger.

The reality goes beyond racism. Racism was brutal in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s, when segregation, housing discrimination, and limited job access were common. But during those decades, Black families were more intact than they are today. Marriage rates were higher, fathers were more present, and children were more likely to grow up with two parents under one roof. If racism were the determining factor, then family breakdown should have been most severe during those years of open and legalized discrimination. Instead, it has worsened in the decades of expanded rights, greater opportunity, and larger government support.


The more complicated truth is that bad policies and destructive cultural shifts did more damage than Jim Crow ever could. Welfare programs designed as safety nets encouraged dependency and replaced fathers with government checks. Public housing and food subsidies made it easier to survive without the stability of marriage, while simultaneously discouraging the pursuit of ownership and independence. Popular culture, once anchored in church, family, and community pride, began to glamorize irresponsibility, promiscuity, and violence. Responsibility was replaced by indulgence. Fathers were replaced by bureaucracy. And through it all, leaders who once thundered against Moynihan for daring to sound the alarm looked away as the very outcomes he predicted became reality.


The issue before us now is not whether racism exists—of course it does, and of course it still shapes many aspects of American life. The real question is whether racism alone can explain the collapse of the Black family. The evidence is clear: it cannot. What we are living with is the legacy of choices, incentives, and cultural decline. And the refusal to confront this truth has been as damaging as the problem itself.
Until leaders and communities accept that responsibility, marriage, and cultural renewal matter more than promises, subsidies, and slogans, the decline will continue. Progress cannot be built on dependency. It cannot be outsourced to Washington.

It cannot be delegated to activists or politicians. It must be rebuilt in the home, in the community, and in the culture. That was Moynihan’s warning sixty years ago, shouted down as racism at the time. Today, the silence of his critics tells us everything. What he saw as a looming danger has become our present crisis. The family is broken, and without restoring it, no law, no program, and no leader will deliver the future we were promised.

Fifty-Six Years of the African American Day Parade Holding Harlem’s Line

Larnez Kinsey
-
0
Fifty-Six Years of the African American Day Parade Holding Harlem’s Line

Harlem didn’t wake up for a show.

It woke up for remembrance.

By late morning on Sunday, September 21, 2025, Adam Clayton Powell Jr. Boulevard was already doing what it has done for generations, holding memory in plain sight. Folding chairs lined the sidewalks like punctuation marks. Drums tested the air before the first banner ever appeared. Elders claimed their corners early, not out of habit, but out of stewardship.

This was the 56th Annual African American Day Parade, and from the first note to the last float, it was clear: Harlem wasn’t trying to impress anyone. It was honoring itself.

Fifty-Six Years Is Not a Moment, It’s Muscle Memory

For more than half a century, the African American Day Parade has arrived every third Sunday in September with the same quiet insistence: we are still here, and we still know who we are. That kind of consistency isn’t ceremonial. It’s cultural discipline.

This year’s theme, “Education is Our #1 Priority,” wasn’t confined to banners or speeches. It was visible in posture, precision, and presence. In the marching bands that moved like classrooms in formation. In the educators and principals walking the route not as honorees seeking applause, but as pillars being recognized by a community that knows their labor intimately.

Education here wasn’t theoretical. It was embodied.

When the Street Becomes the Curriculum

As the parade moved north along Adam Clayton Powell Jr. Boulevard, the street transformed into a living syllabus. Youth drumlines demonstrated focus earned through repetition. Dance teams showed what discipline looks like when joy is allowed to coexist with rigor. Community organizations from more than a dozen states marched as if Harlem were home because on this day, it was.

Nearly 900,000 people were expected, yet the atmosphere resisted anonymity. The crowd spoke back. Applause traveled in waves. Elders nodded in recognition. Children pointed with certainty. This wasn’t passive spectatorship; it was collective participation.

Celebrities appeared, as they do. But the rhythm never shifted for them. Harlem doesn’t pause its truth for proximity to fame.

The Weekend Was Designed With Intention

The parade was only one chapter. The day before, the Get Involved Literacy, Health, and Culture Celebration at Adam Clayton Powell Jr. Plaza grounded the weekend in care. Free health services, accessible panels, live performances, and meaningful giveaways made the theme tangible.

This was education beyond the classroom, education that acknowledged bodies, access, and lived realities. A reminder that learning doesn’t exist without wellness, and celebration doesn’t last without support.

Investment Without Spectacle

True to its legacy, the parade continued its commitment to the future by awarding scholarships through the Abe & Lucinda Snyder Scholarship Fund. No grandstanding. No inflated announcements. Just intentional investment in students still shaping the next chapters of Black American life.

It was a quiet moment, met with sustained applause. The kind that understands what’s at stake.

Harlem as Archivist

As the afternoon stretched toward evening and the last organizations passed, the energy didn’t dissipate; it settled. People lingered. Conversations continued. Nobody rushed to dismantle what had been built in the street.

Because Harlem had done what it always does when it is allowed to be whole: it preserved memory without freezing it, honored legacy without sanitizing it, and reminded the nation that Black culture is not an event, it is infrastructure.

This was not a performance.

It was a remembering.

And for 56 years now, Harlem has been consistent about one thing:

Memory is an act of power.

Politics, Economics, and Employment: The Real Price of Free Speech

DAMON K JONES
-
0
Politics, Economics, and Employment: The Real Price of Free Speech

Congress is preparing to debate a bill that Democrats say will protect free speech. The target is government intimidation. Under the proposal, federal officials would be barred from using regulatory threats to pressure networks, journalists, or entertainers into silence. On paper, it looks like a safeguard against abuse of power. In reality, it exposes how little protection legislation can offer once politics, economics, and employment collide.

The recent suspension of Jimmy Kimmel makes the problem plain. His remarks about Charlie Kirk led to affiliate stations pulling his show. The FCC chairman had already warned of “consequences” for networks, a threat that carried no legal order but plenty of weight. That is the kind of political pressure this bill claims to prevent. Yet even if the FCC had remained silent, affiliates still faced two other realities: economic decline and the leverage employers always hold over employees.

Free speech is not just a matter of government restraint. Market incentives and workplace rules also shape it. A law may stop regulators from bullying networks, but it cannot stop viewers from leaving, advertisers from pulling dollars, or bosses from enforcing contracts. The Constitution may protect speech from Washington, but it does not protect it from economics or employment.

Free speech is easier to defend in theory than in practice. The Constitution bars the government from silencing speech, but it does not stop officials from threatening consequences that make companies police themselves. When the FCC chairman warned of “consequences” after Jimmy Kimmel’s comments about Charlie Kirk, no paperwork was filed, but the message was clear. Fear can be as effective as censorship.

But politics alone do not explain why affiliates acted so quickly. Economics does. Charlie Kirk has a large and loyal following, and networks are aware of how fragile advertiser relationships can be. Viewers can disappear overnight, and sponsors with them. For affiliates, the risk of angering Kirk’s base meant gambling with millions in revenue.

Late-night television itself is also in decline. Nielsen data show all three network 11:35 p.m. shows—CBS’s The Late Show, NBC’s The Tonight Show, and ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel Live!—down 70 to 80 percent in the key 18–49 demographic since 2015. That year Colbert replaced Letterman, Fallon succeeded Leno, and Kimmel moved into the late slot. By 2018, the decline was undeniable. Advertisers spent $439 million on late-night TV that year; by 2024, half that amount. For affiliates already squeezed by shrinking audiences and shrinking ad dollars, one controversy was not just a political risk — it was a financial accelerant to a business already collapsing.

There is another overlooked reality. Free speech is not free when you are an employee. Jimmy Kimmel may be a household name, but he is still an employee of Disney. His contract, like most contracts, has morality clauses and escape hatches designed to protect the company’s brand. The First Amendment does not shield workers from their bosses. Teachers, nurses, police officers, factory workers, or journalists all face the same truth: if your words cost the company money, your job can be gone by Monday.

So when Kimmel was suspended, three forces converged. Politics created fear of regulatory punishment. Economics magnified the danger of audience loss in a shrinking market. Employment rules gave the company the final authority to silence him in the name of brand protection. Each of these forces alone would have been enough. Together, they made suspension inevitable.

The proposed free speech bill may restrain political intimidation, but it cannot repeal economics or employment contracts. A law may stop an FCC chairman from threatening networks, but it cannot prevent advertisers from walking away or employers from protecting their bottom line. For ordinary Americans, that is the real lesson.

Teachers have lost jobs for Facebook posts. Nurses have been fired for speaking out about hospitals. Police officers have been pulled for job duties. Journalists have been dismissed for tweets that offended advertisers. In each case, politics, economics, and employment combined to decide what kind of speech survived. The Constitution may promise free speech, but in practice, it survives only when it carries no cost. Once it does, the marketplace — and your employer — will remind you that freedom always has a price.

America First or Isreal First? Why Black America Cant Afford to be Blind

DAMON K JONES
-
0
America First or Isreal First? Why Black America Cant Afford to be Blind

Donald Trump rose to power with a clear promise: “America First.” It was bold, simple, and resonated with millions tired of watching politicians spend elsewhere as the country weakened.

But promises and slogans mean nothing if the results tell a different story. And the results today look less like “America First” and more like “Israel First.”

In Trump’s current term, more than $12 billion in U.S. military aid has already been approved for Israel—American tax dollars sent overseas while our schools crumble, families drown in debt, and Black businesses can’t get the support they need. That’s not America First.

Every dollar for another nation’s security is a dollar not spent rebuilding our own communities. Israel grows stronger while working-class Americans, especially Black Americans, are left weaker. This is the harsh reality of America’s foreign aid priorities.

How does this keep happening, no matter who’s in office? The answer is simple: AIPAC. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee is one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington. They pour millions into campaigns, pressure lawmakers, and make sure no politician — Democrat or Republican — steps out of line when it comes to sending money overseas.

It’s the oldest game in politics: concentrated benefits and dispersed costs. AIPAC and its donors get the concentrated benefits. The costs are spread so thin across 330 million taxpayers that most people don’t realize how much they’re paying. But for Black America, the cost is very real — less investment in our neighborhoods, fewer opportunities for our businesses, and a government that tells us to be patient while it writes blank checks abroad.

Trump supporters wanted an end to costly foreign aid and a focus on rebuilding America. Instead, foreign entanglements multiplied. Weapons deals, endless aid—under “America First” the actions show a foreign-first agenda. The results are unmistakable: Americans get nothing in return.

And let’s not forget how Trump regained power. He won in large part because Joe Biden and Kamala Harris failed to pull Israel back when the Gaza war intensified. Many voters were disgusted with the way the White House gave Israel a blank check while ignoring the cries for a ceasefire and turning a deaf ear to civilian deaths. That failure opened the door for Trump. Yet now, as president, the right is beginning to see what many feared: when it comes to Israel, Trump is no different than Biden and Harris. The money still flows, the bombs still fall, and America’s priorities are still somewhere overseas instead of here at home.

And this isn’t just about Trump or Biden. It goes back further — to Clinton, and even more sharply to Barack Obama. Obama, as the first Black president, had a historic opportunity to empower Black America. Instead, he empowered the same pro-Israel lobbyists who have dictated U.S. foreign policy for decades. Black communities received soaring speeches and symbolic representation, but the tangible outcomes — economic development, reparations, strong schools, and real ownership — never materialized. Obama’s presidency proved the point: even with a Black face in the White House, the priorities still served the lobbies, not the people.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: Black America has missed this hustle. We get caught up in emotional politics—race-baiting, gestures, party loyalty—while our money gets played. We cheer for speeches and symbolism but overlook billions leaving for Israel, Ukraine, and elsewhere as our schools fail, our health lags, and our businesses struggle. Black leadership won’t question aid to Israel, fearing charges of anti-Semitism—even as Israel targets Christians and Muslims in Gaza. Where are leaders like Al Sharpton and Jamal Bryant questioning billions for Israel? They prefer DEI policies, which haven’t delivered for Black people, over confronting the reality: billions go abroad while our neighborhoods are neglected. Pro-Israel money keeps Black leaders and influencers quiet on Israel aid and on reparations.

If we don’t demand real results now, our tax dollars will continue to fund everyone else’s future. “America First” stays empty words, Black America stays ignored, and our reality won’t change without direct action.

The Real Divide: How the Powers That Be Keep Us Separate

DAMON K JONES
-
0
The Real Divide: How the Powers That Be Keep Us Separate

I keep coming back to a moment in American history most people have never been taught: when the Black Panthers sat down with poor white southerners and called them brothers in the same struggle.

It was the late 1960s in Chicago. Fred Hampton, only 21 years old, was leading the Illinois chapter of the Panthers. Across the table sat the Young Patriots, white migrants from Appalachia — some fresh out of Kentucky and Tennessee, carrying the baggage of Confederate flags and southern poverty. By every measure, they were supposed to be enemies. But Hampton saw what others wouldn’t: the same system that kept Black families trapped in Chicago’s ghettos was also oppressing poor white families who had come north looking for work.

Alongside Puerto Rican activists, they formed what became known as the Rainbow Coalition. They established free health clinics. They fed children. They organized tenants. They advocated against police brutality. And for a moment, those barriers of race and region mattered less than the shared reality of poverty and neglect.

That was too much for the powers that be. Within months, Hampton was dead — assassinated in his bed in a raid by Chicago police working hand-in-hand with the FBI. The Rainbow Coalition was smeared, infiltrated, and destroyed. Not because it failed, but because it was working.

And here we are in 2025, and the pattern remains unchanged. White Democrats continue to keep Black voters in check by warning of racism and fascism around every corner. Republicans maintain the loyalty of poor white voters by stoking fears of immigrants and “woke culture.” The words may be new, but the outcome is the same: the two largest groups of struggling Americans are too busy fighting each other to realize that both parties are collectively exploiting the country.

Which brings me to the question that keeps nagging me: if the Panthers and the Patriots were alive today, do you think they’d stay silent about the trillions of U.S. tax dollars leaving this country? Do we really believe they wouldn’t be calling out the billions flowing to Israel, Ukraine, and defense contractors while poor Black neighborhoods and poor white towns fall apart right in front of us?

That’s the point. They didn’t have to agree on everything to see the big picture. They didn’t see eye to eye on race. They didn’t erase their differences. But they understood the establishment. They knew the government that militarized police in Black neighborhoods was the same one that left Appalachia in ruins. They knew their survival depended on standing together against the powers above them, not fighting each other at the bottom.

And yet, by 2025, we have lost that habit of dialogue. We don’t sit face-to-face in union halls, church basements, or community centers anymore. Instead, we scroll through our feeds as algorithms shove outrage into our faces. We’ve allowed political gangs and media corporations to define our enemies — not by results, but by slogans.

Meanwhile, the money continues to flow — but not into our neighborhoods, out of them. Bridges fall apart. Schools shut down. Hospitals close. Families drown in debt. And the same establishment that failed us all tells us to keep blaming each other.

The truth is, the biggest threat to those in power has never been Russia, China, or terrorism. It has always been ordinary Americans realizing they share more in common with each other than with the politicians who manipulate them. That’s why Hampton was killed. That’s why King was silenced when he started the Poor People’s Campaign. That’s why Malcolm was taken out after he called for global solidarity.

The question is whether we remember. Whether we have the courage to look beyond the slogans and fearmongering, and to see that the real enemy isn’t across town or across the aisle. It’s above us.

Division is their weapon. Dialogue is our strength. And history has already shown us what happens when we dare to use it.

1...484950...178Page 49 of 178