Yesterday, I had the privilege of being able to attend a private screening of a new upcoming film - Call + Response. It is a riveting film that deals with some of most surreptitious present-day human evils around the world. And Reformed/Evangelical folks want to talk about abortion and/or gay-marriage all day as though it is the most pressing moral issue of our day. Really?!?! I wish I could say more, but I'm short on time right now.

Check out the trailer:



From the Call + Response website:

CALL+RESPONSE is a first of its kind feature documentary film that reveals the world’s 27 million dirtiest secrets: there are more slaves today than ever before in human history. CALL+RESPONSE goes deep undercover where slavery is thriving from the child brothels of Cambodia to the slave brick kilns of rural India to reveal that in 2007, Slave Traders made more money than Google, Nike and Starbucks combined.

Luminaries on the issue such as Cornel West, Madeleine Albright, Daryl Hannah, Julia Ormond, Ashley Judd, Nicholas Kristof, and many other prominent political and cultural figures offer first hand account of this 21st century trade. Performances from Grammy-winning and critically acclaimed artists including Moby, Natasha Bedingfield, Cold War Kids, Matisyahu, Imogen Heap, Talib Kweli, Five For Fighting, Switchfoot, members of Nickel Creek and Tom Petty’s Heartbreakers, Rocco Deluca move this chilling information into inspiration for stopping it.

Music is part of the movement against human slavery. Dr. Cornel West connects the music of the American slave fields to the popular music we listen to today, and offers this connection as a rallying cry for the modern abolitionist movement currently brewing.

To find out more, click here.

Will Smith's 'Hancock' Fiasco
By Eileen Jones

"Hancock" is supposed to be a wry commentary on the pressure of being Will Smith, but the message gets lost in a big-budget Hollywood train wreck.

"Hancock" starts off with an inspired idea: Will Smith as an angry street person alienated by his own superpowers. Smith's Hancock is overlaid with two potentially volatile elements that accompany Smith everywhere: his race and his superstar status. In the typical Will Smith movie, those elements are neutralized and made to play nice together. That's why everybody not only loves Will Smith, but loves to boast about how much they love him; because of his unique ability to negotiate black stardom with such aplomb, distributors have long claimed he "transcends race" (meaning his films sell anywhere, even in regions and nations where racial prejudice typically limits the box-office appeal of certain stars). You can see the logic behind Barack Obama's joke that he'd like to see Will Smith play him in a movie. In turn, Will Smith joked on a recent episode of "The Colbert Report" that Obama might ruin his own plan to become the first African American president. Each recognizes in the other his fellow "transcender." Both are engaged in a public high-wire act that's exhausting to watch, in part because it must appear to be as effortless and uncalculated as possible.

In succeeding so spectacularly so far, both men risk accusations of "transcending race" by selling out, flashing megawatt smiles while skating over the bitterness of the African American experience, refusing to display anger, appealing to white audiences with endless reassurance: See how smoothly we've succeeded, how apparently unscarred we are by experience, what solid citizens we are with our nicely tailored suits, our picture-perfect families, our upbeat attitudes. Madison Avenue couldn't have come up with better advertisements for racial progress in America than Obama and Smith.

Which somehow makes it a downright relief to see Will Smith slouching around in a greasy watch cap, drinking cheap bourbon out of the bottle and swearing at anyone who looks at him. It's clear that the marketing drones who designed the film's preview actually understood the appeal of the project, making it all about Smith- -- Smith slouching, Smith snarling, Smith drunk, Smith looking dirty and smelly and low-down, Smith seeming to care nothing about his own appeal, his own powers or his own popularity. Seeing him play the opposite of the slick "Mr. July" blockbuster persona is an example of the conspiratorial joy we feel watching any big star subvert his or her own image, knowing that our star will be restored to us before long. We know Will Smith will emerge clean, handsome and can-do, just like we know the supposedly plain, awkward, badly dressed girl will get a makeover and turn into Anne Hathaway. We like watching this star-emerging process over and over.

But in "Hancock," Smith's roll in the gutter followed by his transformation back into his usual shiny star-self has an even bigger kick to it: It's a spasm of guilty pleasure when the African American Superman allows the audience, for a moment, to share the inhuman, exhausting strain of trying to be "twice as perfect."

To read the rest of the article, click here

Frederick Douglass: A True American Prophet
By Jonathan L. Walton

The 4th of July is a high and holy day on America’s civil religious calender. It is a time for Americans to read patriotic speeches by the “founding fathers,” extol the virtues of “sacred” documents such as the Declaration of Independence, and unite our voices with the national hymns of Francis Scott Key and Julia Ward Howe.

Moreover, today we will hear, explicitly and implicitly, the theological doctrine of American exceptionalism proclaimed from both ecclesial and secular pulpits. Just as John Winthrop, the first governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony, declared America to be a “City on a Hill,” many will continue to elevate America as the moral arbiter of the world; God’s divine voice and example in all matters of freedom, justice and democracy.

But there are also those who have used the 4th of July to indict this nation concerning the incongruence between her self-professions and actual social practices. Famed abolitionists and American statesman Frederick Douglass is an example. Before the Rochester Ladies’ Anti-Slavery Society on July 4, 1852, Douglass offered what many consider one of the greatest speeches of the century.

“What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?” illumines the hypocrisy of a nation unable to check and challenge itself concerning its own moral hubris. True to form to the jeremiadic tradition, Douglass’ address transcends the particular topic of chattel slavery and the historical moment of its delivery. Douglass directs us back to the founding principles of this nation, even as he calls Americans to critically examine our own perverse dealings with one another as well as the world. This is what made Frederick Douglass, unlike those who sat at the helm of political power, a true American patriot. Rather than ignore or gloss over the travesties of this nation, Douglass was willing to uncover and confront them. And if we, too, are committed to America, we would do well to do the same.

Black Girls Get Pregnant and Get Scorned; Why Do the Gloucester Girls Get Tea and Sympathy?
By Tonyaa Weathersbee

By now, another racial stereotype ought to be biting some big-time dust.

It seems that in Gloucester, Massachusetts, a fishing town described as white, Catholic and blue collar, students who walk the halls of the local high school this fall may find themselves bumping into classmates who will be returning with their own bump. Seventeen girls at Gloucester High School are pregnant -- more than four times the number of pregnancies that the school of 1,200 has had in a year.

Time magazine recently reported that the pregnancies may have been part of a pact that the girls entered into to give birth to and raise their children together. But the principal of the school, Joseph Sullivan, has been silent since making that assertion -- possibly to quench the media firestorm ignited by that sordid tale. The mayor of the town, Carolyn Kirk, is vigorously denying that there was any pregnancy pact -- saying that Sullivan now claims his memory of the details is foggy.

Me, I believe Sullivan’s memory is just fine. It’s his courage that has lapsed.

But Kirk and others needn’t worry too much about the town’s reputation because ultimately, the Gloucester girls will receive more of society’s sympathy than its scorn. The fact that the media is focusing on whether there was a pact and whether the girls are victims of a celebrity culture that spawns movies like “Juno” and “Knocked Up,” says that when white kids do something that smacks of antisocial behavior, people are quick to dig for explanations.

When black kids do antisocial things, people think that all they need are sermons.

To read the rest of the article, click here

This work, In Dialogue with Bearing the Image, is basically a compilation of questions that I had after listening to Thabiti Anyabwile’s session talk titled Bearing the Image at the 2008 Together 4 the Gospel (T4G) Conference.

This is not an academic or technical work that seeks to disagree or provide agreement, in whole or in part, with Thabiti’s talk. The work should be viewed as the initial response of a listener who takes advantage of the Q&A at the end of such a presentation. Therefore, my compilation is at its root an inquiry of various aspects of Thabiti’s talk and not a critical evaluation that seeks to weigh the value of the session or conclude with an overall opinion.

I care for Thabiti Anywabile as a brother in Christ and respect him as a fellow believer and minister of the Gospel. The motive for responding to this piece is based on my honest and humble desire to inquire of the views set forth by Thabiti.

» Read More

Why Juneteenth’s Not My Thing
By John McWhorter

I am John Hamilton McWhorter, the fifth. The first John Hamilton McWhorter was a slave. This Thursday is Juneteenth, when I might be inclined to celebrate the emancipation of John Hamilton McWhorter, the first.

Or not. Truth to tell, I have never quite gotten the hang of Juneteenth.

I suppose I should. What could be wrong, after all, with celebrating slaves in America being freed? Technically, Juneteenth arose to mark the day slaves in Texas were freed, but over the years it has been embraced nationwide as a
celebration of emancipation.

But at the end of the day, I just can’t wrap my head around celebrating the fact that someone else freed my ancestors. It puts too much focus on a time when we were so starkly in the down position. Juneteenth seems to be about what someone else did.

Whites had been crucial to keeping the Abolitionist movement going. Certainly blacks worked alongside them: The career of Frederick Douglass is Exhibit A. And there were more slave revolts than we are often aware of.

However, we cannot say that blacks in America made their freedom happen. Freedom happened partly as the result of whites making other whites see the error of their ways. And Abraham Lincoln’s commitment was to preserving the Union as a political arrangement, which inherently included abolishing slavery. And even then, the Emancipation Proclamation did not free all slaves, just slaves in the Confederacy, over which Lincoln had no jurisdiction.

So, yes, blacks played a part—but if for some bizarre reason blacks had not participated in the Abolitionist movement and had never revolted, it is thoroughly plausible that emancipation would have happened anyway.

Think about it: The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was something that happened because we made it happen. As we have recently revisited in the wake of Hillary Clinton’s famous comment, Lyndon B. Johnson was the one who pushed it through Congress. However, he wouldn’t have done what he did absent the ferocious tenacity of Dr. King, his black comrades and the countless black people who gave their time, energy and sometimes their lives to battling Jim Crow to its knees and changing the nation’s mind on bigotry.

Juneteenth has also always left me a little cold because of what happened after slaves were freed.

To read the rest of the article, click here.

Hating on the Celtics: You Know How We Do
By David Aldridge

Despite the franchise's groundbreaking racial history, hating the Boston Celtics used to be the birthright of black basketball fans everywhere. Now, like so much else, that is changing, too. Green is the new black.

Among the things that have, until now, been universal truths in professional basketball:

· Someone, every three years, will be compared to Michael Jordan. It will be a fallow comparison, and the poor fellow will soon be playing in Europe, if playing at all.

· The Miami Heat, year in and year out, will have the finest dance team in the league.

· Black people will hate the Boston Celtics.

It has been a contradictory relationship between African Americans and the Cs, as they are known throughout the league. Boston was the first team to draft a black man (Chuck Cooper, in 1950). It was the first team to give a black man its head coaching job (Bill Russell, in 1968). The Celtics, who have won more titles than any team in league history (16), often did so with three and four black players on the court at the same time—when that wasn't accepted practice among the league's more racist owners, and their legendary coach and general manager, the late Red Auerbach, famously allowed his black players to walk when they refused to play in an exhibition game in Kentucky in 1961 after being refused service at a local restaurant.

Yet the Celtics have been a pariah for most of black America that pays attention to the NBA, and that's much of black America. And now, the Celtics are again in the NBA Finals, with a chance to win their 17th championship tonight at home against the Lakers. Their home court, TD Banknorth Garden, will be filled to capacity. It will be loud. It will be intense.

And there will be a lot of black people wearing Celtic green.

Trust me, this is new. Having been to Boston a couple dozen times over the past two decades, one thing you never used to see at Celtics games was many black folk. But last week, I watched in amazement as the Jumbotron scoreboard above the floor showed picture after picture of black fans rooting alongside their white counterparts for Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and the rest of the Celtics' stars.

I saw black women, lots of black women, cheering and laughing. I don't recall ever seeing a black woman at the Garden before that didn't have a mop or a ladle in her hand. I wish I were making that up.

To read the rest of the article, click here.

From NewAfrican:

How many times, as an African, have you watched a Western TV report about your country, shaken your head in disgust and exclaimed: “But my country is definitely more than that, it’s not just slums! Why can’t they show the positive side as well?” How many times have you had the same feeling after reading about your country in a Western newspaper or magazine? Well, there are many reasons explaining why the Western media chose to report Africa in such negative tones. This month our extended cover story is devoted to examining some of the reasons. So please sit back and be prepared to challenge your opinion. Whatever you thought about Africa, you must think again. This lead piece is by our editor, Baffour Ankomah.

The negative reporting of Africa by the Western media is a subject very dear to the hearts of discerning Africans. It is a subject that New African has covered extensively before (in our July/August 2000 issue). But not much has changed in the eight years since we last tackled it, and the recent hyperbolic reporting of the Kenyan and Zimbabwean elections gives us even more cause to revisit the subject. Why was the Western media so interested in the Zimbabwean elections but just gave a passing glance to both the Nigerian and Sierra Leonean elections held last year? More so when 200 people died in pre- and post-election violence in Nigeria? Why, as they claim to be “the paragons of objectivity and balance”, do they rarely extend this to Africa in their coverage of the continent?

To read the rest of the article, click here.

The illustrations and metaphors of Scripture are utterly astounding, revealing, illuminating and evocative. On a recent day during my readings through Jeremiah, I found myself at Jeremiah 13.

As I was feeling particularly discouraged and weak on this morning, I wondered whether I should break from my regular readings in Jeremiah to take in a Psalm or select from the list of texts about “hope” and “encouragement” in the New Testament. It seemed they were by in large a better prescription for the day than the prophet Jeremiah, also known as the weeping prophet. Could I emotionally and spiritually take in and process Jeremiah this morning? Would he not simply add to my frustration and burden by reminding me of the continued transgressions of God’s children Israel? Nonetheless, I decided to take the leap into Jeremiah anyway, mainly because I find safety in visible (or even artificial) progression and perceived order.

» Read More

Boondocks vs. BET, Round II
By Greg Braxton

The battle between “The Boondocks” creator Aaron McGruder and Black Entertainment Television is about to get a lot more animated.

Two second-season episodes of the biting cartoon series that attack the black-themed network but were never aired, possibly because of corporate pressure, are slated for DVD release today. The pair of shows take aim at BET’s top executives and lampoon what it views as the cable network’s harmful negative imagery and stereotypes that work as a “destructive” force within African-American culture.

The episodes amplify a familiar chord struck by McGruder, who has regularly targeted BET, first in his politically and culturally charged comic strip and subsequently in the TV adaptation on Cartoon Network’s edgy late-night programming block, Adult Swim.

But these particular installments, which like many in the animated series feature violence, foul language and frequent use of the N-word, apparently went too far in mocking BET’s top brass. In “The Hunger Strike,” a main character refuses to eat until BET is off the air and its executives commit hara-kiri.

And in “The Uncle Ruckus Reality Show,” a foul-mouthed black man who hates African-Americans gets a show on BET. When BET executives learned of the shows, they complained to Turner-owned Cartoon Network and Sony Pictures Television, which produces “The Boondocks,” and urged that they be blocked from broadcast, according to sources close to the program who requested anonymity for fear of network reprisal.

To read the rest of the article, click here.