By Danette Clark January 2, 2013
To start at the beginning of this series, go here – Part 1 – Obama’s Religion of Reparations – The Pro-Reconciliation Church.
This is the sixth and final article in The Reparation Agenda series. Previously, I named several appointees, friends, and colleagues to President Obama who are actively and deeply involved in the reparations movement, including one of his closest friends, Charles Ogletree, and several members of the president’s Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships council.
As I’ve stated in the past, several players in the reparation movement express different goals from others players. While some are looking for a check to the descendants of slaves, President Obama’s friend, Charles Ogletree, who is head of the Reparations Coordinating Committee, says that “reparations lawsuits must not stop at compensation alone.” Ogletree goes on to say that, “reparations is more than an exercise in education and remembrance. Reparations advocates ultimately seek the redistribution of resources from one group to another”.
Some have even expressed a desire to see capitalism destroyed rather than allow whites to continue to enjoy the fruits of an economic system, that they believe, was built by slaves.
Regardless of the desired outcome or goals, the reparations movement is much larger and more powerful than many realize. If you’ve read this entire series, you see that this movement, which started decades ago, has progressed from a demand made by James Foreman in 1969 for payment of 500 million dollars to a possible coming revolution that has made great strides by infecting churches, schools, our elected officials, and international law.
In Obama’s Race Rhetoric Literally Scripted by the Reparations Movement and International Law, I explained some of the claims being made in reparation lawsuits and how President Obama’s race rhetoric is part of a strategy to advance those claims.
Another claim being made is ‘unjust enrichment’. This is a legal claim that alleges that one party has been unjustly enriched at the expense of another. In other words, plaintiffs in reparation lawsuits are alleging that whites have and are still benefitting from the labor of slaves.
The race rhetoric coming from our President tells us that he believes this to be true as well.
Most people have misunderstood the meaning of “You didn’t build that!”, because they aren’t looking at Obama as someone who supports reparations and believes white folks are enjoying the fruits of slave labor.
In a video recently uncovered by Aaron Klein, Obama is heard making another statement that confirms he views successful people as ‘unjustly enriched’. In the video, Obama is speaking at a Harvard Law School black alumni celebration and says that those who’ve been successful in the private sector deny the “role of blind luck and a generation of women doing someone else’s laundry and looking after someone else’s children…” to get them there.
What generation of women could he be referring to if not black women who worked in the homes of white families during the Jim Crow era?
It’s no coincidence that while President Obama continually reminds us that successful people don’t deserve the success they enjoy, reparation litigators, who happen to be close friends of the president, are preparing lawsuits against hundreds of corporations claiming that those corporations have been unjustly enriched by slave labor and subsequent Jim Crow laws.
Obviously, a great deal of effort has been made by many African Americans as well as others who (as we say in the south) don’t even have a dog in this fight. But why? Why would people who are not the descendants of slaves and many who aren’t even African American, for that matter, work so hard toward reparations for slavery? What’s in it for them?
That’s where Derrick Bell comes in. But first a little background on Bell. The late Derrick Bell was a professor at Harvard University. Bell is known as the creator of ‘critical race theory’, which, in a nutshell, is the theory that U.S. law is racist – that it was created and is still structured to uphold white supremacy.
To many, Bell became an expert on racism and the law. As sort of a spin-off to the critical legal studies course offered at Harvard, Bell’s critical race theory became a course of study as well.
In 1994, while teaching a course titled “Current Issues in Racism and the Law” at the University of Chicago, Barack Obama routinely assigned, as required reading, several of Derrick Bell’s writings.
Today, Bell’s critical race theory is taught in universities across the country and used by K-12 educators to indoctrinate students in class warfare and the idea that America is institutionally oppressive and all white people are racist. These very schools are part of a network of schools launched and promoted by President Obama. Read more about them and Bell’s critical race theory in the classroom here and here.
Bell is well known for his racially charged remarks and writings and even endorsed an article calling for the abolishment of the white race. The article, which was discovered and revealed by Aaron Klein and Brenda J. Elliott, is titled “Renew the Legacy of John Brown” and was published by Race Traitor magazine, whose credo is “treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity”.
Several months ago, Breitbart.com released a video of President Obama paying homage to and hugging Derrick Bell. Shortly after, another video was released of Charles Ogletree admitting that he attempted to hide the video of Obama and Bell during Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign.
Although Derrick Bell’s racial rantings and theories on race and the law could have been harmful to President Obama’s reputation, they aren’t the only reason Ogletree tried to hide Obama and Bell’s relationship.
What Ogletree was likely hiding is the fact that Derrick Bell could arguably be considered the father of the reparations movement.
Not only are Bell’s writings studied and taught by numerous reparation activists, including Charles Ogletree, Adjoa Aiyetoro, and Cornel West, but his theories on race are being used to build reparation claims and literally restructure the law to accommodate those claims.
Bell’s critical race theory says the constitution is flawed, that it only affords liberties to whites, and was intentionally structured to keep blacks down.
Using Bell’s theory as the foundation from which to form reparation claims, Ogletree and his fellow litigators have been working feverishly to change the constitution.
In Obama’s Race Rhetoric Literally Scripted by Reparations Movement and International Law, I explained the work being done with the United Nations to see that claims for reparations for slavery can succeed under international law. But the change of venue to international court may not be necessary for success if President Obama can succeed in changing U.S. law.
By appointing those sympathetic to the movement to the supreme court, the constitution can be changed so that reparations can succeed at home.
Already, Obama has managed to appoint Elena Kagan, who has known both Ogletree and Bell for more than twenty years. In 1985, Kagan, then a student at Harvard, edited an article on critical race theory written by Derrick Bell in which Bell explains why he believes the constitution is the problem and refers to the document as “a form of original sin”.
In April of 2010, Charles Ogletree wrote an op-ed in support of Kagan in her nomination to the supreme court.
President Obama, himself, has referred to the constitution as “flawed” and “a document of negative liberties.” In 2008, when talking about civil rights and the constitution, Obama went so far as to say that “the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of the redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society”.
Obama now has four more years to nominate more students of Derrick Bell’s critical race theory to the supreme court. Meanwhile, several White House staff members are doing their part to change the constitution to fit the agenda.
Harold Koh, an Obama appointed legal advisor to the State Department, believes the constitution should be altered to mirror international law.
Since his appointment on March 23, 2009, Koh has actively attended meetings of the Assembly of States Parties of the International Criminal Court to negotiate the terms of U.S. participation and the eventual ratification of the Rome Statute. Under the Rome Statute, reparation claims can be tried by the International Criminal Court.
Although Bell’s critical race theory is crucial to the reparations movement, it’s the application of his ‘interest convergence’ theory that Ogletree and Obama most likely wanted to hide, because it not only shows Obama’s hand, but reveals and explains a tactic of manipulation.
There are many white-haters associated with our president, but what makes Derrick Bell different is that if you look at his theories on race and the law through the lens of the reparations movement, it brings clarity and understanding to much of what President Obama does and says.
Bell’s theories are being studied and applied to change the way people think about race and the rich for the purpose of bringing about a marxist-style re-distribution of wealth that will place blacks on top and ‘abolish the white race’.
I recently explained how Obama’s race rhetoric is necessary to the movement, but the reason for the rhetoric — the very theory behind it — comes from Derrick Bell.
Refer back to my earlier question – why would so many people who don’t have a dog in this fight (would not benefit from reparations being paid), work so hard to obtain reparations for African Americans? The answer is ‘interest convergence’.
This theory is the one we should all be focusing on when talking about racism, reparations, and understanding President Obama’s game.
Bell’s interest convergence theory says that white people will support racial justice only to the extent that there is something in it for them. In other words, only if white people have a dog in the fight will they support justice (reparations) for blacks.
The usefulness of interest convergence has been studied by reparation advocates across the globe.
In 2004, Charles Ogletree wrote Tulsa Reparations: The Survivor’s Story, specifically to explore “the ability of reparations litigation to transform the American debate about race by promoting “interest convergence” between reparations advocates and the majority population”.
Transform the debate? Obviously, to create a convergence of interests – convince the majority that there is something in it for them as well – you have to mess with people’s minds, right?
Ogletree admits this when he writes about opportunities “to teach about the manner in which interests converge, providing a stepping stone to re-orient the public’s perception about what people’s interests are and where they converge”.
Ogeltree further explains that empathy is one step toward manifesting interest convergence. Refer back to The Reparation Agenda: Obama’s Religion of Reparations – False Prophets in the White House. Several of the president’s appointees are attempting to appeal to Christians and working within churches to create guilty consciences and drum up empathy for African Americans by painting whites as evil oppressors.
What other ways can an interest convergence be created between African Americans and the majority to advance us toward the redistribution of wealth? How about demonizing the rich, othering them by labeling them as “the 1%”, and hammering home the notion that the rich aren’t paying their fare share? It’s us against them and they owe us. Isn’t that the game Obama plays?
Students are being taught that big money and corporations are evil and that white racism against minorities abounds. Indoctrination to create a convergence of interests.
Reparation activists have even infiltrated our history books and museums to create a convergence of insterests by changing history (or at least our perception of it).
In fact, once elected, President Obama wasted no time appointing Johnnetta Cole as director of the Smithsonian National Museum of Arican Art in 2009. Cole is directly responsible for the exhibits on race now being featured at Smithsonian museums.
As reported by the Blaze.com, the exhibit, Race: Are We So Different, includes a five-minute video that describes Christopher Columbus as someone who only “colonized and conquered” the natives he encountered and refers to Thomas Jefferson as merely a “slave holder”.
Johnnetta Cole is a member of the Reparations Coordinating Committee along side Charles Ogletree. Ogletree refers to Cole as one of the team’s ‘social scientists’. Social science is propaganda — the use of techniques to affect people’s thinking and behavior. So Cole’s job is to mess with your mind for the benefit of the reparations movement and Obama has given her a tremendous stage from which to do so.
Even our downed economy and massive job losses create a convergence of interests by creating a larger class of poor — a majority that might buy in to the lie that the redistribution of resources from the evil elite is just what this nation needs.