EXPLAINING TO MY COLORLESS (WHITE) FRIENDS THE SOLUTION TO THE AMERICAN PROBLEM AND ENDING THE CIVIL WAR THAT WAS ESCALATED BY THE MURDER OF GEORGE FLOYD

"[Slavery] is one of the greatest crimes in history . . . . many of the issues that still trouble America have their roots in slavery".

- President George W. Bush, while visiting Senegal on July 8, 2003,

My father once told me, “If you want to solve a problem, you must go to the origin. Otherwise, whatever you do, the problem will continue to grow and rear its ugly head.”

America is in a new stage of the ongoing Civil War that previously escalated in 1967. The vast majority of the colorless (white) people who I talk to want two things: 1) peace/non-violence and 2) more dialogue. This, they believe, is the proper way of solving the situation that has escalated since the murder by torture of George Floyd by the Police officers whose job it is to serve and protect and keep the peace. Since the the 1960’s, we have been warning America,

“NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE”.

So you can’t say that this was a surprise to anyone except for people who refused to listen and understand. Every effort has already been made to protest peacefully, and every effort was met with resistance, not acceptance and action. Rather than discussing this, I am simply going to outline, very clearly, what must be done now to end the Civil War in America.

1. Recognize the origin of the problem.

2. Take Responsibility for the Crime Against Humanity

3. Pay Reparations

4. Conduct a United Nations Sponsored Plebiscite for African American Self Determination

5. Support the immediate formation of Black Community Protection Forces

Recognize the origin of the problem is that America was created by committing a genocide of indigenous and African heritage people, a crime against the humanity of African heritage people (trans-Atlantic kidnapping, trafficking and enslavement), and a riot and insurrection by a factious group of disturbers of the peace called the Sons of Liberty who attacked British police at the Battle of Golden Hill On January 19, 1770. This eventually led to the Boston massacre and the American Revolution against the British government led by colonial insurrectionists.Thus, the first action in the solution is the public acknowledgement of this narrative and a rejection of the established "patriotic” narrative taught in American society and schools.

America must then take responsibility for the Crime Against Humanity. Here I remind you of some of the efforts that have already been made to hold America accountable and why there is no need for any more dialogue:

September 2, 1924 - The Universal Negro Improvement Association submits its Petition of Four Million Negroes of the United States of America to His Excellency the President of the United States Praying for a Friendly and Sympathetic Consideration of the Plan of Founding a Nation in Africa for the Negro People, and to Encourage Them in Assisting to Develop Already Independent Negro Nations as a Means of Helping to Solve the Conflicting Problems of Race

1946 - The National Negro Congress submits its Petition to the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations Stating The Facts on The Oppression of the American Negro.

October 23, 1947 - W.E.B. DuBois submits AN APPEAL TO THE WORLD!: A Statement on the Denial of Human Rights to Minorities in the Case of Citizens of Negro Descent in the United States of America and an Appeal to the United Nations for Redress. Fearing that the double standard would be exposed, President Truman’s State Department worked relentlessly to undermine the emerging human rights infrastructure at the U.N. In internal documents, the State Department admitted that it was worried about the creation of an international forum where it would be too tempting to raise the “Negro problem.”

December, 1951 - William Patterson and Paul Robeson submit We Charge Genocide: The Historic Petition to the United Nations for Relief from a Crime of The United States against the Negro People . The petition detailed, among other things, 152 incidents of killings of unarmed Black men and women by police and lunch mobs between 1945 and 1951.

April 3, 1964 - Malcolm X gives his famous, “The Ballot or the Bullet” speech stating, “Human rights are something you are born with. Human rights are your God-given rights. Human rights are the rights that are recognized by all nations of this earth. And any time anyone violates your human rights, you can tak them to the world court.” Thus, Malcolm X revealed his intention to utilize the United Nations. On May 21, 1964, Malcolm X stated,

“The American black man needed to recognize that he had a strong, airtight case to take the United States before the United Nations on a formal accusation of ‘denial of human rights’ - and that if Angola and South Africa were precedent cases, then there would be no easy way that the U.S. could escape being censured, right on its own home ground.”

On November 29, 1964, Malcolm X stated,

“You and I must take this government before a world forum and show the world that this government has absolutely failed in its duty toward us.”

Finally, Malcolm X mentioned the United Nations topic for the last time on February 16, 1965, just days before his death. stating,

“as long as you call it civil rights your only allies can be the people in the next community, many of who are responsible for your grievance. But when you call it human rights it becomes international. And then you can take your troubles to the World Court. You can take them before the world. And anybody anywhere on this earth can become your ally.” A few days later, Malcolm X was killed.

1977 - The New Afrikan Prisoners Organization (NAPO) petition to the United Nations.

December 11, 1978 - The National Conference of Black Lawyers, the National Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, and the Commission on Racial Justice for the United Church of Christ submit a petition to the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities.

November 5, 1979 - The National Black Human Rights Coalition organized a march of 5,000 people at the United Nations under the banner “Black People Charge Genocide” and “Human Rights is the Right to Self Determination.”

1994 - Mr. Silis Muhammad delivered Petition for Reparations to the UN under 1503 Procedure – to the UN Working Group on Communications on behalf of African Americans. This was followed up in 1997, 1998, 199 and 2000 with written and oral statements urging the Commission on Human Rights to assist African Americans in their effort to recover from official U.S. policies of enslavement.

May 1997 - As a response to revelations that the CIA was involved in the explosion of crack/cocaine in African American communities, the National Black United Front launched a historic Genocide Petition Campaign Against the United States Government and traveled to the United Nations Human Rights Center in Geneva, Switzerland to present the petition with over 200,000 signatures to Mr. Ralph Zacklin, Officer in Charge of High Commission of Human Rights, Centre for Human Rights. Also, this same Petition/Declaration was submitted to the High Commission of Human Rights in New York on May 27, 1997.

September 3, 2001 - World Conference Against Racism - 18,810 delegates from 170 countries, 16 heads of state, 58 foreign ministers, 44 ministers, 7,000 non-governmental representatives, and 1,300 journalists attending the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (WCAR)

declared that "slavery, and the slave trade, including the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, were appalling tragedies in the history of humanity not only because of their abhorrent barbarism but also in terms of their magnitude, organized nature [and] especially their negation of the essence of the victims . . . [and] that slavery and the slave trade are a crime against humanity..."

At the conference, on September 2, 2001, in a meeting with United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson, Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney presented Robinson with two documents as evidence of the US governments violations of both US and international law and, in particular, specific violation of the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The first document given to Robinson was a confidential Memorandum 46, written by National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski on March 17, 1978 and it details the federal government's plan to destroy functioning black leadership in the United States. This document provides a critical insight into the federal government's concern at the apparent growing influence of the African American political movement. The second document is a report entitled "Human Rights in the United States [The Unfinished Story - Current Political Prisoners - Victims of COINTELPRO]" and it was compiled by the Human Rights Research Fund, headed by Kathleen Cleaver. This document provides an overview of the counterintelligence program which, from the 1950s to the 1980s, was run in the United States against political activists and targeted organizations.

Rather than face these charges, the United States Government's delegation to WCAR walked out of the conference. Days later, the World Trade Center in New York was destroyed.

November 22, 2010 - The National Conference of Black Lawyers and the Malcolm X Center for Self Determination submit a report on Political Repression – Political Prisoners to the United Nations Universal Periodic Review, Ninth Session of the Working Group on the UPR Human Rights Council. The report was endorsed by the following 34 organizations and 53 individuals:
Harold Rogers, Coalition of Black Trade Unionists; Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright; Association Americana de Jurists (American Association of Jurists); Bob Brown, All-African People’s Revolutionary Party (GC); Ramona Ortega, Cidadao Global; Jane Frankin, Author; National Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression; Professor Robert Starks, Jacob Caruthers Center for Inner-City Studies*; Rev. Paul Jakes, Christian Council on Urban Affairs; Sali Vickie Casanova, Black People Against Police Torture: Steve Saltzman, Civil Rights Attorney; Lawrence Kennon, Civil Rights Attorney; Black People Against Police Torture; Susan Gzesh, Human Rights Educator; Dr. Yvonne King, Educator; Atty. Efia Nwangaza; Alderman Lionel J. Baptiste, Attorney; Cliff Kelley, WVON Talk Show Host*;Calvin Cook, Black United Fund Illinois*; Family And friends of Dr. Mutulu Shakur: The Leonard Peltier Defense Offense Committee; AbdudDharr M.K. Abdullah, National Islamic Solidarity Front; Claude Marks, Director, Freedom Archives; People’s Law Office-Chicago, Illinois; Peter and Barbara Clark, Leonard Peltier Defense Committee-Support Group Coordinators; Jeffrey Segal, Attorney at Law, Louisville, Ky; Kamm Howard, Chicago Chapter, National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America, N’COBRA; Judith Mirkinson, San Francisco Women In Black; Leah Pemberton: Yusufu Mosley, Campaign In Support of C# Prisoners; Hondo T’Chikwa, Spears & Shield Publications; Rasheda Weaver, Community Activitist; Standish E. Willis, Civil Rights Attorney, Chicago, Illinois; Alice and Edward “Buzz” Palmer, educators; Alice Kim, A Movement Re-Imagining Change (ARC); Anne Lamb, NYC Jericho Movement; Chicago Committee To Defend The Bill of Rights; Dorothy Burge, Educator, Chicago; Baba Jahahara Amen-RA Alkebulan-Ma’at, Past National Co-Chair of National Coalition of Blacks for Reparation in America (N’COBRA), Oakland, California; Patricia Hill, African-American Police League and Chicago Human Rights Council; Prof. Soffiyah Elijah, Harvard Law School, advisor to the Committee for the Defense of Human Rights; Henry English, Black United Fund of Illinois*; Prexy Nesbitt, Educator; Bill Ware; Randolph Stone, University of Chicago School of Law, Clinical Professor, Mandell Clinic; Josh Khaleed London, Shut-Up Prison Ministry; Emile Schepers, Ph.D., Great Falls Virginia; Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute, Berkeley, CA; Jeffrey “Free” Luers, Earth First! Prisoner Support Project, Portland, Oregon; Prof. Raoul Contreras, Chair, Indiana Univ. NW, Minority Studies Dept*; Indiana U Social Justice Student Group*; Malcolm X Grassroots Movement for Self Determination; Larry Holmes, Activist NYC; Bonnie Kerness, American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)*; Bruce A. Dixon, Journalist; Black Agenda Report; King Downing, Director, Human Rts-Racial Justice Center; Nahal Zamani and Annette Dickerson, Center for Constitutional Rights; Thandisizwe Chimurenga, Journalist; Dr. Kwame Kalamara, Educator; Hugh Esco, Georgia Green Party; Kevin Gray, author

Thus, the “problem” has meticulously been documented and presented to the international community, through the highest channels, of “the problem”. Meanwhile since the Black Studies Movement in the 1960’s, hundreds of thousands of books and articles written by African American professors, have discussed in detail, and added to the works produced by colorless (white) scholars to produce a national body of “knowledge of the problem.” The American public was recently educated about “the problem” by the New York Times 1619 Project. Again, we don’t need to discuss “the problem” anymore.

America must pay Reparations for the Crime Against African Heritage Peoples’ Humanity. In the book, The Wealth of Races: The Present Value of Benefits from Past Injustices edited by Richard F. America, William Darity, Jr writes:

"The later 1960s and early 1970s - a period of great social activism and ferment in the United States -witnessed a surge in calls from black Americans for reparations. . . . The rationale was twofold. First was a 'moral justification deriving .... from the debt owed to Blacks for the centuries of unpaid slave labor which build so much of the early American economy, and from the discriminatory wage and employment patterns to which Blacks were subjected after emancipation.' Second was a justification based on 'national self-interest' . [Robert S. Browne, director and founder of the Black Economic Research Center] perception that such 'gross inequalities' in the distribution of wealth would only further aggravate social tensions between black and whites.

Apparently, neither justification subsequently has proved COMPELLING for American legislators. No scheme of reparations of the type Browne advocated [wealth transfers] ever has been adopted in the United States."

What's important to understand, then, is that it is not for lack of knowing the history and legacy of the slave trade nor any lack of calculating the debt owed that has prevented reparations. In fact, the National Economic Association, the professional organization of black economists, from 1981 to 1985, addressed all of the issues and calculated the costs.

Ransom and Such (1990) calculated that the profits of the slave system from 1806 to 1860 compounded to 1983 came to $3.4 billion. The present value of that sum compounded to the present at an annual interest rate of 5 percent is $9.12 billion.

Larry Neal (1990) derived an estimate of $1.4 trillion based on the gap between the wage an enslaved African would have received had he or shebeen a free laborer and what was spent on slave maintenance by slave-owners between 1620 and 1840. Again, compounding the interest to the present at 5 percent interest yields a total close to $4 trillion by the end of 2004.

James Marketti (1990) utilized a concept of income diverted from enslaved Africans during the course of slavery in the United States to arrive at a figure of $2.1 trillion by 1983.The present value after compounding the interest is $6 trillion. If you use the "40 acres and a mule" from General Sherman's Special Orders No. 15 for a family of four, then, a conservative estimate of the price of land in 1865 is $10 per acre. A conservative estimate of the total number of ex-slaves at the time of emancipation is 4 million which would yield 40 million acres of land valued at $400 million should have been distributed to the ex-slaves in 1865. The present value of that sum of money compounded from 1865 at 6% would amount to $1.3 trillion. If there are approximately 30 million descendants of enslaved Africans in the United States today, the estimate based on 40 acres yields an allocation of slightly more than $400,000 per recipient.

Chachere and Udinskly (1990) estimate that the gains to whites from labor market discrimination during the period 1929-1969 to be $1.6 trillion.

By the year 2000, Joe R. Feagin in his paper Documenting the Costs of Slavery, Segregation and Contemporary Discrimination concluded that "Clearly, the sum total of the worth of all the black labor stolen by whites through the means of slavery, segregation, and contemporary discrimination...taking into account lost interest over time and putting it in today's dollars, is perhaps in the range of $5 to $24 trillion."

Now, according to Walter Olson in his article, "So Long, Slavery Reparations" published in the LA Times in 2008,

"Just a few years ago, at roughly the turn of the millennium, slavery reparations seemed the coming thing. A New York Times article in June 2001 reported that the movement to obtain compensation for slaves’ descendants had “taken on substantial force” and was “gaining steam” both in the nation’s universities and in the black community.

All the major black organizations had signed on, including the NAACP, the Urban League and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Randall Robinson’s book, “The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks,” had hit the bestseller lists in 2000. Many state and local Democratic politicians started to talk up the idea.

Then: nothing. Today, reparations seem to have completely disappeared from the national agenda. Few mention them anymore. What happened? . . . .

In late 2000, a new project called the Reparations Assessment Group began making preparations for lawsuits. The dollar sums mentioned were staggering. Harper’s magazine estimated that it could require $97 trillion to pay for the hours of uncompensated work done during the slavery era, which would require extracting, on average, about $300,000 from every American of non-slave descent. So confident were reparationists of success that they began to map out how the court-ordered funds would be spent. The attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, broke this momentum with an abrupt jolt. It wasn’t just that for quite a few months thereafter Americans of all races preferred to discuss issues unrelated to reparations; it was also that some of the persistent themes that ran through those days, such as national unity, individual heroism, mutual dependence and the implications of mortality were at cross-purposes with the reparations narrative. According to LexisNexis, U.S. newspapers and wire services ran nearly 2,600 stories including the words “slavery” and “reparations” in the year leading up to 9/11. Since then, the yearly average has been less than 1,000."

In January of 1989, Michigan Representative John Conyers introduced

H.R. 40 - A Bill To Acknowledge The Fundamental Injustice, Cruelty, Brutality, And Inhumanity Of Slavery In The United States And The 13 American Colonies Between 1619 And 1865 And To Establish A Commission To Examine The Institution Of Slavery, Subsequently De Jure And De Facto Racial And Economic Discrimination Against African-Americans, And The Impact Of These Forces On Living African-Americans, To Make Recommendations To The Congress On Appropriate Remedies, And For Other Purposes; To The Committee On The Judiciary

The bill has been introduced every year since then but has never been passed.

HERE IS THE MOST RECENT AND MOST ACCURATE REPARATIONS CALCULATION

“We compare the 2018 per capita Black–White wealth gap of about US$352,250 with portions of the estimated total cost of slavery and discrimination to African American descendants of the enslaved. For the period of slavery in the United States, we arrive at estimates of about US$12 to US$13 trillion in 2018 dollars using Darity’s land-based and Marketti’s price-based estimation methods, respectively. Estimates using Craemer’s wage-based method tend to be higher ranging from US$18.6 trillion at 3% interest to US$6.2 quadrillion at 6% interest. The value of lost freedom (LF) based on Japanese American World War II internment reparations is estimated at 3% interest to amount to US$35 trillion and at 6% to US$16 quadrillion. Further research is required to estimate the cost of lost opportunities (LC) and pain and suffering (PS). Further research is also required to estimate the costs of colonial slavery, as well as racial discrimination following the abolition of slavery in the United States to African American descendants of the enslaved. Whether the full cost of slavery and discrimination should be compensated, or only a portion, and at what interest rate remain to be determined by negotiations between the federal government and the descendant community.”

America mus accept a United Nations Sponsored Plebiscite for African American Self Determination. This is really the heart of the matter. At the moment that the former slaves were Emancipated in 1865, they became “free”. What this meant is that the African, his freedom now acknowledged by persons who theretofore had wrongfully and illegally (under international law) held him in slavery by force, was entitled as a free man to decide for himself what he wanted to do -- whether he wished to be an American citizen or follow some other course. Following the Thirteenth Amendment, four natural options were the basic right of the African. As outlined by Imari Abubakari Obadele,

First, he did, of course, have a right, if he wished it, to be an American citizen.

Second, he had a right to return to Africa or (third) go to another country -- if he could arrange his acceptance.

Finally, he had a right (based on a claim to land superior to the European's, sub- ordinate to the Indian's) to set up an independent nation of his own.

Thus, the Fourteenth Amendment is incorrectly read when its Section One is deemed to be a grant of citizenship: it can only be an offer. . . . Indeed, Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment makes clear that Congress could pass whatever law was necessary to make real the offer of Section One. (Section Five says, 'The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.)

The first 'appropriate legislation' required at that moment -- and still required - was that which would make possible for the now free African an informed free choice, an informed acceptance or rejection of the citizenship offer.

Towering above all other juridical requirements that faced the African in America and the American following the Thirteenth Amendment was the requirement to make real the opportunity for choice, for self-determination. How was such an opportunity to evolve? Obviously, the African was entitled to full and accurate information as to his status and the principles of international law appropriate to his situation. This was all the more important because the African had been victim of a long-term intense slavery policy aimed at assuring his illiteracy, dehumanizing him as a group and depersonalizing him as an individual.

The United States government still has the obligation under Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment to ‘enforce' Section One (the offer of citizenship) in the only way it could be rightfully 'enforced' -- by authorizing US participation in a plebiscite. By, in other words, a reference to our own will, our self-determined acceptance or rejection of the offer of citizenship. There are further important ramifications. A genuine plebiscite implies that if people vote against US citizenship, the means must be provided to facilitate whatever decision they do make. Thus, persons who vote to return to Africa or to emigrate elsewhere must have the means to do so. . . .

Now then, we repeat: an obvious and important ramification of the plebiscite is that there must exist the capability of putting its decisions into effect. If the decision is for US citizenship, then that citizenship must be unconditional. If it is for emigration to a country outside Africa, those persons making this choice must have transportation resources and reparations in terms of other benefits, principally money, to make such emigration possible and give it a reasonable chance of success. If the decision is for a return to some country in Africa, the person must have those same reparations as persons emigrating to countries outside Africa PLUS those additional reparations necessary to restore enough of the African personality for the individual to have a reasonable chance of success in integrating into African society in the motherland. If, finally, the decision is for an independent new African nation on this soil, then the reparations must be those agreed upon between the United States government and the new African government. Reparations must be at least sufficient to assure the new nation a reasonable chance of solving the great problems imposed upon us by the Americans in our status as a colonized people."

As already noted above, the Reparations needed amount to about $97 trillion. In the past, the principle objection to Reparations has been the question, “How will we pay for it?” But as the COVID-19 experience has shown, the United States government will come up with trillions of dollars when it feels strongly enough that it is in the nation’s interest to do so.

And this is why property damage and disruption to peace, and an escalation of the conflict, is happening right now in America.

EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO MAKE AMERICA AND AMERICANS CARE ENOUGH TO PROVIDE JUSTICE TO BLACK PEOPLE AND IT HASN’T WORKED. ALL OUR ARGUMENTS, PLEAS, PEACEFUL PROTESTS, AND PETITIONS HAVE BEEN IGNORED. SINCE WE DON’T HAVE AN ARMY OR THE CAPACITY TO ENGAGE IN A MILITARY CONFLICT TO DEFEND OUR INTERESTS, OUR ONLY RECOURSE NOW IS TO DESTROY ENOUGH PROPERTY TO THE POINT WHERE AMERICANS WILL FEEL STRONGLY ENOUGH TO PAY THE TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN REPARATIONS AND CONDUCT THE UN SPONSORED PLEBISCITE FOR AFRICAN AMERICAN SELF-DETERMINATION.

Now, why is the UN Sponsored Plebiscite for African American Self Determination THE SOLUTION?????

Simply because it is the only method for giving all black people in America what is owed to them while at the same time giving the colorless (white) Americans what they want: peace and dialogue.

Black people have been denied the opportunity to make their free choice and utilize reparations to set up a society of their choice, be it in America, Africa, or their own nation.. Since the 1830’s, there has been no consensus within the black community as to what path to pursue. At the African Peoples Commission held in 1998 under the theme “Building on the Tradition: Lessons of African American Conventions and Congress for the Black Radical Congress”,

“So, the continuously arising central question manifested itself again in 1975: What is the relationship of African Americans to the United States? Is this the land where we should struggle and attempt to transform after investing so many years? Or is this land beyond our abilities to reform, and therefore we should look for another place to live? Or is there some alternative?”

That question has never properly been settled because at the moment of Emancipation, the legal mechanism to settle the question - the plebiscite - was never conducted. Thus, to this day, you still have some blacks that believe in the American dream, some blacks who want to return to their ancestral homeland in Africa, and some blacks who want the same opportunity as any other people in the world to establish their own government and exercise national self-determination. THIS IS NEVER GOING TO CHANGE. SO IT IS ESSENTIAL TO SATISFY ALL OF THEM.

So the intelligent thing to do is to identify the people who believe in America, share its values, and want to stay and help build America and enable them to do so with equality and justice. Likewise, those who want to return to Africa and those who want their own nation, are never going to give that up and will always struggle to get what they believe is owed to them and is their right. So if America doesn’t give it to them, they will try to find a way to take it and make it happen. These are not the kind of Black people America wants so JUSTICE should be served for them so that they can exit America peacefully. Most Americans will have no problem with black people voluntarily returning to Africa (although they will object to paying for it), but it is the last one that is going to cause the most controversy.

In the aftermath of the 1967 rebellions, the Republic of New Afrika was established and sought to establish a land base for its government in nation in the area where black people where the majority population - the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina. This effort, however, for various reasons, was not supported by black or white Americans. Given the complete frustration and hopelessness of African Americans in the wake of George Floyd’s murder by torture at the hands of the police, a significant segment of the black community has said enough and wants out of America, having concluded that justice cannot be obtained from within America. The objection, however, will come from white people forced to move from this territory. To this, the remedy is simple: the United States must compensate its own citizens who are forced to relocate as the cost of providing justice and reparations for the crime against the humanity of African heritage people.

However, the biggest objection will come from the United States Government that cares more about its national interest than rectifying the crimes against humanity and providing Justice. The United States Government will be loathe to peacefully cede some of its territory which it gained by conquest.

This is where the solution is depended on colorless (white) people’s willingness to combat white supremacy - the concept and its application that ensures that the interests of white people are more valuable and above justice for black people.

The problem now is not that we don’t know what the solution is. The problem now is whether or not colorless (white) people have the will to pursue justice, even when it requires sacrifice on their part. That’s really what the problem is…. As long as the United States Government compensates its citizens for their relocation, the sacrifice is only the pain of being forced from the homes and communities which they have become attached to. But isn’t that really the cost the must be paid for forcibly removing African heritage people from their homes, families and communities in the first place? How is it deemed acceptable and justifiable in the latter’s case but not in the former’s???

Edward Eugene Onaci concludes in SELF-DETERMINATION MEANS DETERMINING SELF: LIFESTYLE POLITICS AND THE REPUBLIC OF NEW AFRIKA, 1968-1989,

“Since the 1968 Black Government Conference, the RNA has worked hard to research and make the case for reparations. In 1972, the RNA released its “Anti-Depression Program,” a plan designed “To End Poverty, Dependence, Cultural Malnutrition, and Crime” and to “Promote Inter-Racial Peace.” Specifically, the program posits three legislative requests and delineates how their fulfillment would help solve some of U.S. society’s problems. The requests are as follows:

I. An Act authorizing the peaceful cession of land and sovereignty to the Republic of New Africa in areas where blacks vote for independence.

II. An Act authorizing payment of three hundred billion dollars ($300,000,000,000) in reparations for slavery and unjust war against the black nation to the Republic of New Africa.

III. An Act authorizing negotiations between a commission of the United States and a Commission of the Republic of New Africa to determine kind, dates, and other details of paying reparations.

The drafters of these acts were convinced that, if carried out, these measures would solve the overwhelming majority of problems the authors identified, namely un- and underemployment, economic and political dependence, poverty, inadequate health, subpar education, poor selfesteem, and unhealthy social relationships amongst Black people and between them and others, especially White Americans.

The program’s drafters establish an intimate connection between these problems and the Black Nation’s colonial relationship with the United States. Therefore, the authors contend addressing these issues by enacting the “Anti-Depression Program’s” three juridical proposals would result in the “removal of the [United Stands] hands” from Black people’s self-determination. In underscoring the necessity of abolishing white interference, the plan’s composers divulge, “And this may be, for whites, the most difficult part. Whites, so used to us as ‘our Negroes,’ must remove their hands from our culture, our economies, our schools, our government, our persons.” By calling for a “removal of hands,” the architects of this program reinforce their previous calls for independence as the solution to Black people’s problems while simultaneously attempting to hold White Americans responsible for their infractions against the U.S. Black population.”

Finally, in the meantime, while the effort to pursue the above is taking place, the immediate need of the black community is the ability to protect itself from police violence. The immediate solution to this is also simple: establish Black Community Protection Units and I have previously outlined the instructions on what the black community needs to be doing now completely independent of the colorless (white) community. The colorless (white) community - those who are demanding justice and and end to police violence - must explain to their fellow citizens why they need not fear the establishment of Black Community Protection Units whose only purpose is to arrive at the scene at the same time as police when there is the possibility for episodes of police violence as we just witness in Minneapolis. If there’s a counter force strong enough to act as a deterrent to police misconduct, then the police will not engage in misconduct.

As the last word on this, consider now the most distinguished human being of the the 20th century. On October 4, 1963, His Imperial Majesty, Emperor Haile Selassie, King of Kings, Lord of Lords, Conquering Lion of Judah addressed the United Nations and said,

“Yet, this is the ultimatum presented to us: secure the conditions whereby men will entrust their security to a larger entity, or risk annihilation; persuade men that their salvation rests in the subordination of national and local interests to the interests of humanity, or endanger man's future. These are the objectives, yesterday unobtainable, today essential, which we must labor to achieve.

Until this is accomplished, mankind's future remains hazardous and permanent peace a matter for speculation. . . . .The goal of the equality of man which we seek is the antithesis of the exploitation of one people by another with which the pages of history and in particular those written of the African and Asian continents, speak at such length. Exploitation, thus viewed, has many faces. But whatever guise it assumes, this evil is to be shunned where it does not exist and crushed where it does. . . .

that until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is finally and permanently discredited and abandoned;

that until there are no longer first class and second class citizens of any nation;

that until the color of a man's skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes;

that until the basic human rights are equally guaranteed to all without regard to race;

that until that day, the dream of lasting peace and world citizenship and the rule of international morality will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but never attained. . . .