According to Joseph C. Phillips, Black History Month is a noble idea that continues to place Black people on the margins of American society.

Black History Month Treats Our Contributions to America’s Narrative as an Asterisk
By Joseph C. Phillips 

Each year during the month of February, Americans gather together to celebrate the significant contributions black people have made to this nation. We call it Black History Month or the now more politically correct National African-American History Month.

The idea by Dr. Carter G. Woodson is a noble one. For far too long, black contributions to our national culture were marginalized. The black presence in the American narrative was all but absent. As the great Flip Wilson observed, “Why should they invite us to the party when we’re doin’ all the cooking?” But if pushing black folk to the margins by ignoring our contributions made us second-class citizens in the past, keeping us on the margins as a way to celebrate our contributions is to continue to see being a black American as being an American with an asterisk.

One of the rationales for the creation of a Black History Month was the correct observation that the continued presence of that asterisk separated black people from an American history and American cultural values that we had earned through sweat equity. Alas, that asterisk also opens the door to the influence of ideas and philosophies that are counterproductive to continued American success and black success in America.

For the rest of the story, click here. 

The bottom line is that the privatization of U.S. National Security is a trend that has been ongoing for years. And the billions of dollars disappeared by contractors in Iraq make disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff look like Little Bo Peep.

Mercenaries are in the Military to Stay: Get Used to It!
By Lorelei Kelly 

Remember that old movie “Escape from New York”, the one where the city has become a large prison populated by violent and depraved criminals? A story that fell between the cracks of the State of the Union last month — two downed Blackwater helicopters, five Americans dead — made me remember the images from that film. No escape, not by land, not by air, not by sea.

Some news reports speculate that four of the five were shot on the ground. Ugh and sigh. I know it is hard for some people to feel outrage or grief over the death of private military contractors — an attitude that I often find is supported by perverse logic and misplaced anger about our own government’s dysfunction. The bottom line is that the privatization of US National Security is a trend that has been ongoing for years. It was a conversation that Congress forgot to have during the heady government-hatin’ rally that passed for a legislature for the past decade. So here we are. The Washington Post recently reported that there are some 100,000 contractors in Iraq alone, including 25,000 private security contractors.

This exceeds the number of all coalition forces combined, and is only 40,000 less than the number of U.S. troops in Iraq. It is a virtual army of largely unregulated individuals working on behalf of U.S. national interests. From strategic weapons systems as the B-2 stealth bomber and Global Hawk to running ROTC programs, the military has been colonized by corporations. This is all legitimate business created by our own government — though the billions of dollars disappeared by contractors in Iraq make Abramoff look like Little Bo Peep.

When I was a Hill staffer some years ago, I remember going on a site visit to one of our national labs. Our tour guide and host gave me a card with both the US Government and Lockheed Martin logos on it. I was puzzled, but it didn’t strike me until later just how pervasive this sort of privatization is. Later, after a missile defense trip larded with industry dollars, I became a purist. I don’t want profit making entities to have a large decision making influence on any part of our government.

Handing over public tasks to the free market without a thorough discussion about what are essential government responsibilities is the hallmark of the era that just ended. The new Congress has set out an ambitious agenda of contract oversight. But a much larger conversation needs to happen at the same time. Now is the chance for Democrats and rebellious Republicans to put forward a governing philosophy that will provide a backdrop for all policy decision making: One that values a public sector that is the keeper of our collective memory. Values measured by the common good, not by NASDAQ.

For the rest of the article, click here. 

At least twice a month, a White person tells me that I look like Wood Harris. Although I see the resemblance, most Black people think I’m crazy. Thoughts?