Ron Christie "Acting White" - Right Identification, Wrong Analysis

Ron Christie , Republican politico and media spokesman recently wrote a book: "Acting White: The Curious History Of A Peculiar Slur ".

I listened to Ron Christie on the radio today.  As I was driving I flipped through my preprogrammed buttons and I hear a conversation about Black people.  It was the "Dennis Preger Show".

Preger was asking the guest "Why would any group of people believe that  academic achievement and speaking a certain way is 'acting White'?"

In the process of the interview Christie told of his run in with Rep Maxine Waters as he worked for a White Republican US Congressman.  According to Christie Waters said to him "No Black man that I know would work for the enemies of Black people, the Republicans".   I am not sure that Waters is able to look at the RESULTS that the Black community suffers as favorable people "work for" Black people and see the harm that they do as well, despite the favorable ideological alignment.

In response to the question about the subpar academic results see in too many Black people Christie assigned the blame to the "Black Power Movement".  When Black people were told that by following the ways of White people was sellout behavior our regard for academic excellence was lost.

Christie's interview was shortened because he was having problems with his cellphone.  I did not capture the full measure of his thoughts.

With respect to what I heard I believe that he identified a correct set of problem areas but scored a miss on the narrative of why the problems persist.

The adoption of the "Black Power" is not the answer.  

The real problem is that the movement lacked "Human Resource Management & Development Skills" over the institutions that they first won the policy directions over and then the political control per the "favorable people in charge".

The issue - as I see it - is that throughout the legitimate struggle against White supremacy and the continuing erosion of our community's interests the logical goal of taking over the key institutions in our community was focused upon putting "favorable people into power" and their attachment to the larger ideology and political party in the "American Political Domain".  With the success of nullifying the most blatant systematic racial grievances through legislation, regulation and lawsuits the way was lost by the failure to manage certain goals through the institutions that they now controlled.

When I say "progressivism is inorganic" it is not an empty epithet.   The tool that brings forth conscious indictments against external institutions is not necessarily the tool that is necessary to achieve the desired results from the institutions that are now under your control.  After decades struggling for quality education on the front steps of the school board the force that lead this effort found it self in the seat of power, being on the hook to deliver the quality standard that they dinged other people for failing to deliver.

Empty rhetoric and "moral outrage" had to yield to the discovery of an more exact pedagogy to educate Black children from the inner city.

Over time we have heard about the drive for "ebonics" education and the replacement of "Eurocentric" history books with those which have a more "accurate" view of what history's victors have done to people who did not look like them.   They might have even settled for Howard Zinn's "A People's History Of The United States".   "Phonics" or the "Whole Language" ready approach.  'Sex education" and condom distribution with "in school daycare" - all to remove the barriers of education from taping the text book closed.   These poor and failing school systems became a testing ground for economic theories and social engineering beyond the class room.

 As factions fought over theory and policies few people realized that the products of many of these schools lacked the academic proficiency that were needed beyond their small section of the city where their consciousness were tuned to.

The proper answer for Mr Christie to give is that the entirety of the academic experience of the schools in question are out of synch with the suite of skills that are desirable outside of their domain of comfort.
The call for "School Integration" is not the proof of "Black inferiority" from a GENETIC stand point.  In truth is it a tacit admission that the present defacto culture and character that is too often produced in poor, inner city schools is not congruent with the culture and socialization that presently offers the people jobs, advanced educational opportunities and exposure to a broader range of social  experiences beyond the "hard knock life" of the streets.

My problem with the NAACP and others (Obama) who fear the "all Black school in the ghetto" is not that it assumes "Black inferiority".  It is that they know in their heart that in order to MANAGE the institutions to the point where more desirable results are obtained - they might have to abandon some of their key indictments against the greater society as well as put themselves on the hook for delivering the desired outcomes through the institutions "by any means necessary" - even if they have to abandon their ideological methodologies which are popular but not effective.