Malcolm X Statue2

After his spiritual awakening, Malcolm X struggled to get the message of justice to descendants of slaves in the United States. The facts he laid out about their lives were clear and incontrovertible. Descendants of slaves have been treated unjustly by both federal and state institutions from the inception of the United States Government.

Institutionalized social injustice is easy to identify. It is usually articulated in written form. It is when the law intentionally legitimates the practice of economic or educational discrimination against a class of people based upon one or more identifying characteristics like race, religion, national origin, or gender.

The legal remedy for institutionalized social injustice is addressed through the judicial system which includes the national Congress. A court may have state or federal jurisdiction whereas Congress and the Supreme Court have both state and federal jurisdiction under the Constitution. However, if either one or both judicial systems are corrupt then government is urged by a democratic process of voting to change the law but if it does not heed that urge then that government is brought down by political revolution.

The goal of both the democratic process and political revolution is to repeal discriminatory laws. If government responds in favor of justice for all its citizens then discriminatory laws are repealed. Those laws are then replaced by laws which prohibit economic and educational discrimination on the bases of race, religion, national origin, or gender.

Malcolm X addressed another kind of justice, too. He addressed the issue of moral justice. The origin of moral justice may or may not overlap with institutional justice.

Moral justice may be related to institutionalized injustice but moral injustice may also exist when there are no institutional issues at all. Put another way, governmental laws may not discriminate against a class of people based on class, race, national origin, or gender. Nevertheless, one or more groups may find that they are consistently on the short end of the stick when it comes to the distribution of goods in society. Or an individual or group may be singled out for ridicule and physical mistreatment but not as a result of government action.

Again the judicial system may afford any person a legal procedure by means of which he or she can bring a claim against a person in a civil court for a tortuous act committed against him or her. The court then can apply the law in its effort to restore a person or group to a condition of wholeness. But what if a person or group commits a wrongful act against herself or itself? What kind of justice applies in that situation?

That question should lead us to wonder whether there is a broader form of justice at work than what we normally think of. We should wonder whether it is true in our personal lives that our every act and thought trigger effects which come back to us multiplied hundreds of times and which either benefit us or harm us materially, emotionally, and spiritually.  

Many kinds of social problems which are faced by descendants of slaves cannot be addressed by judicial institutions because they are problems which arise from individual and family sentiment. Sentiment in turn is the product of collective fears and attractions and so the choices made within families and the community by individuals is more or less a mirror image of collective sentiments.

What is good for us has value for us in the short and long run. It is what benefits both an individual and his or her family and community. The three dimensions of our lives make up our moral world, a world which is held together by collective sentiments.

What drives collective sentiment and thus individual choices within a family and/or community is fear or attraction. Fear or attraction in relation to others around us and the conscientious application of the cost/benefit ratio in all decision making opportunities we are presented with.

Making choices is an opportunity for each of us to grow because choices present us with a challenge. We either lash out irrationally and retard our growth or are attracted to others and make stronger ties with those in social relation to us.

We make choices understanding that each choice causes some beneficial and some harmful side effects. There is no perfect decision. But there are good ones which add value to our lives.  In the short and/or long run we individually and collectively benefit more than we are harmed.   

In our personal lives, much of what we suffer is the effect of poor decision making within the context of our individual, family, and community relations. That kind of self inflicted harm cannot be remedied in any court of law because the judicial system has a limit to its reach. Beyond that limit it is superseded by a broader system of justice.

There is yet another scale of balance. It is set within each of us, our families, and in our communities. It is precise in its measurements of our actions and the benefit or harms which result from them.  It is indifferent to whether we benefit or are harmed. It is a measure of justice which seesaws up and down on the right pan in opposite relation to the up and down movement on the left pan. It is a scale which is tilted by our actions as well as by our inactions. Descendants of slaves should be very concerned about what harmful acts are being weighed against them today.

Intra-racial murder and disease are the leading causes of death among descendants of slaves in the United States, today. Those facts mean that our individual, family, and community sentiments and the actions which arise from them are more harmful than beneficial to us in the scale of justice. The growth or retardation challenge is tilted against growth and in favor of retardation for descendants of slave.  That is a social fact.

We are now faced with too many children of descendants of slaves who are generally untrained and increasingly irrational in their behavior. That is so because their sentiments have become hateful and their fears are directed toward one another. Yet those sentiments are shaped by the sentiments of the adults who raise them. Negative sentiments are like a contagious disease which is passed over from one generation to the next. Thus, over time we as a community describe in our moral motion a downward spiral with no end in sight.

Is this justice too impersonal, too indifferent to what we have suffered here in the United States that it would allow us to collapse? The answer is yes, it would because we are held solely responsible for our actions under its jurisdiction.  

Even though it seems unfair and cruel on the surface; we are therefore getting what we deserve. By the strict law of necessity, we are getting what we deserve even though many of our youth were in part made to be the monsters they have become not by choice but by conditioned reflex. Nevertheless, it is solely our actions which are counted in our scale of balance.


The wheels of justice turn mechanically throughout the entire universe. Unseen, like the inner gears of a clock, a scale of balance inheres in all things and tips the scales on both the left and the right sides. Thus justice is indifferent to whether or not we understood what we did at the time we committed an act or whether we meant to do a particular act. It simply measures the weight of every act both beneficial and harmful. Both intelligent and ignorant creatures and non-living things are held to the same standard of proportionate justice.

A seagull dives to catch a fish in a lake but it misjudges the depth of the lake. It breaks its neck and dies. Justice has exacted a cost proportionate to the misjudgment and circumstances of the seagull.

An exhausted mother falls asleep. She rolls over onto her newborn infant and smothers it to death. The mother’s intent is irrelevant. Justice will hear no plea for pity from her. No deal can be made with her that will circumvent the dispassionate movement of justice. Her baby is dead and will remain dead forever. Justice has exacted the proportionate costs for both the infant’s suffocation and the mother’s negligence under the circumstances.

One group does not hunt in season and that group starves to death while another group hunts in season and lives. Justice is indifferent to both the pleasurable and the painful consequences which one may gain or suffer. Justice has proportioned merit on the basis of their action and inaction.

One group learns the sentiments of fear, anger, jealousy, hate, and envy toward its family members and others in its community. They kill and steal from each other. That community dies even though they were forced to live impoverished lives in a ghetto because living in a ghetto does not make one act ghetto. Ghetto behavior is a mirror of one’s sentiments.

Another group learns sentiments of attraction and caring for one another and they survive and thrive even though they put the other group in the ghetto subjecting them to abject poverty. Committing wrong on an outside group does not make one act wrong to those in their own group. Their moral world may not collapse if it is held together by strong positive sentiment.

But justice is paradoxical in nature. The paradox is that while it is indifferent to all outcomes it simultaneously demands that you love one another to avoid harm. Love for self, family, and community therefore is the key to your individual, family, and community survival under the rule of proportionate justice.






Welcome to EarthColoney.Net: “…IF ONLY THEY KNEW THEY WERE SLAVES”, by Dr. Steven Nur Ahmed

 Book Cover Earthcolony

Traceable through the history of western and middle-eastern intellectual work  is a particular line of reasoning about humanity based upon race.  That line of reasoning stems from a set of assumptions about humanity and social hierarchy. They have been and are destructive to the inherent dignity and rights of all human beings.

In this book I will, in the following order, cover its ancient historical roots in Torah mythology, Platonic mythology and philosophy, Aristotelian anthropology and philosophy, and Enlightenment anthropology.

All four of those sources and the hinge assumptions they turn on have turned into powerful modern theories which have become inextricably embedded into our modern social structures, statutes, court decisions, social policies, and individual and collective subconscious.  Indeed, those assumptions are the skeletal system of our society while government is the muscle.

harriet tubman

More specifically that particular line of reasoning has been both intentionally and collaterally expressed throughout our social  institutions because that particular line of reasoning was institutionalized as the ‘law of the land’ from the inception of the United States in its Constitution.[1]  It filters down all institutions and to every individual. Harriet Tubman once shared for us an insight of hers about the psychology of a slave. She said: “I freed a thousand slaves. I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves.” Therein lies the problem at the heart of the issue.


Through educational and religious establishments the slave mentality has  been correspondingly embedded in the deepest recesses of our subconscious as a set of assumptions that are unquestionably valid. As such those assumptions have also served as a psychological defense mechanism used by Euro-Americans to effectively preempt human social inclusion and justice on a national scale.


That line of reasoning in fact describes a 2,400 year old downward spiral in relation to the quality of human reasoning about social justice. This is so because the few who do benefit from such a line of reasoning cannot benefit from it in the absence of extreme social injustice and its consequent unequal distribution of wealth.  Further, the few who benefit must also establish and maintain conditions of oppression to further  their world order.  It is like nuclear radioactive fall-out. You can’t see it, you can’t smell it, you can’t touch it, but it permeates everything and destroys all living creatures.


The ‘fall-out’ from their line of reasoning describes a global canopy of  assumptions  above and beyond which few are able, daring enough, or willing to rise up to challenge.  As such, it has caused a narrowing of the mindscape and thus our field of vision. It even causes African-Americans to frame their social justice movements upon the same set of assumptions which are used to maintain social injustice.  So, the vernacular of our civil rights movements has not been truly antithetical to the white supremacist assumptions which cause injustice.

 Malcolm X

The welding together of such glaring contrarieties as the appeal for justice in the language of injustice has doomed every social justice movement from the turn of the 20th century to the civil rights movement of the 1940s, 50s, and 60s. That is why the socio-economic conditions of African Americans are worse today than they were 60 years ago.  That is echoed in what Malcolm X said:     

“It is incorrect to classify the revolt of the Negro as simply a radical conflict of black against white or as purely [an] American problem. Rather, we are today seeing a global rebellion of the oppressed against the oppressor, the exploited against the exploiter.”

White supremacist assumptions about race gird up a definition which is today the dominant force shaping what we know about the origin, history, statuses, roles, social rights and obligations expected by and of every person on earth.  It also serves the manifest function of maintaining the economic status quo.

“As a man thinketh, so shall it be”

Our language frames our  thoughts. Pictures are embedded in the words as metaphors.  Language is also laden with metaphorical assumptions about other people. Most of us never dig deeply into the etiology or nature of the words we use in everyday speech to help us comprehend those assumptions. We are casual in our use of such words, in our reasoning with them, and on the sentences we make up by such words. That means we’re ignorant about how words work on our collective sentiment and the collective sentiment of all.

Words and sentences merge with the natural world and have a powerful descriptive effect on our mindscape and social relations. They are forms and sound embedded with assumptions.  They are linked together and  through categorizations are welded together into real actions. They come alive such that we participate a social construction foundationally set to make us closer to or farther from  ethnic groups different from our own. We pass that meaning on from one generation to another usually subconsciously but also consciously. That is the purpose of culture.  It engenders casual habitual behaviors.

We are verbally casual in our interpersonal interactions but we can also be very logically fallacious in our reasoning, too, because we don’t scrutinize the nature of what we say. Neither do we scrutinize the classical literature which still makes up our popular  religious and liberal arts education and which shapes our world view.

Further, those same religious and liberal arts world views  dominate our substantive and procedural law as well as scientific bodies of knowledge. If we were to become more conscious and critical of our language, then we would discover those bedrock assumptions which drive both the rationalizations of oppressors as well as oppressed persons as they are actively and or passively concretized into political policy, social classes, castes, roles, rights, obligations, and statuses.

 digging into the mind


Whether or not we do ‘dig deeply’ into our subconscious to question those bedrock assumptions, which trigger our social responses to others who are ethnically different, depends in part upon the amount of advantage one gains in society or our lack of competing on a level playing field.  The assumptions I  explore do give advantage to some groups and do make other groups socially disadvantaged.


The ruling classes or castes never question the ‘bed-rock’ assumptions as long as those assumptions as applied in society have worked to get them a disproportionate share of social benefits. For them it’s the proverbial saying which rings true: ‘if it works, don’t fix it.’ In the Americas, it works for ‘White’ people, so they don’t fix it and as long as it does work for them they don’t intend to fix it.  The white supremacist’ world view has been and is very effective on maintaining the order they want.


During the twentieth century circa 1930, a sociologist by the name of Emory Bogardus did a study called the ‘Social Distance Scale’. His bipolar questionnaire asked persons specific questions about how they would feel working with, living near, or marrying into other ethnic groups. What resulted from his study was a ranking of social distance determined by individual’s preferences and between different ethnic groups. In short, most persons ranked English and American ‘Whites’ as the most acceptable groups to work with, be ‘near’ socially and marry within while at the bottom were conspicuously non-Caucasian ethnic groups such as Indians (India) and Africans.


I posit in this book that the subconscious assumptions for making social distance real is an ‘offense’ mechanism as well as defense mechanism for plutocrats.  Whether one is offensive or defensive depends upon the circumstances. For example, the institution of slavery was purely offensive in nature whereas affirmative action law instigated defensive reactions to subconscious assumptions held by racist Caucasians.


Some persons are true believers in the ideology of race and so rationalize ‘racism’. In that case those persons evaluate and judge according to their assumptions about others and in so doing convert their beliefs into a ‘state of mind’  which is then acted out as discrimination.


That discrimination is the social distance in real space and time between one person or group and another. Persons acting affirmatively on their prejudice and by the distance they cause by their prejudice they stigmatize and criminalize, i.e., discriminate (krima: to condemn-Greek) other persons and ethnic groups. Such is what we mean by social marginalization, segregation isolation, and poverty.


All of these mental mechanisms condition a knee-jerk reflex by individuals and  have both the psychological and social effect of lowering the esteem of some persons in society at large.  By these mental mechanisms, the bedrock subconscious assumptions are consciously rationalized as cult, ideology, or belief and even ‘pseudo-science’.


One of my other premises is that no understanding of the ‘race’ problem can be had without a knowledge of the history of its development in Western culture.  Exactly, what is ‘Race’? In order to answer that question I shall critically examine that idea and how it has been rationalized as ideology and ‘pseudo-science’.  Furthermore, I shall examine how the idea of race was intended to be used as a social construct to further the aims of economic, cultic, and political repression and exploitation.


Another premise of my book is that no solution to the so-called ‘race’ problem can be had through conversation using the very categorical concepts and words which carry stigmata and krimata onto other groups and which are the cutting edge of fallacious racial assumptions.  What simply happens during intellectual discussions which employ terms like ‘black people’ and ‘white people’ is that everyone is reinforced in their ideology of race.  In such circles, the expectation of a race premised conversation to end the disastrous effects of racism on our society is a logical reduction to absurdity.





[1] United States Constitution: Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3


murder victim

Throughout the United States citizens in large and small cities have been grappling with the problem of ‘black on black’ homicide and violent assaults.  Political conservatives (Republicans) have argued for more police force presence and for increased incarceration while political liberals (Democrats) have argued for stricter gun laws and that education and jobs for the underclass of African American youth be instituted.


Both the conservative and liberal views ignore the fundamental problem faced by all African Americans. That is because their thinking is tied to erroneous ideological assumptions. Their assumptions actually support interests contrary to the interests of the African American community.


Need I even mention the left’s arguments?  They are entirely out of sync with the present problems faced by the African American community today. In fact, who are they? Where are they? Since the demise of labor unions they have become a joke. The left has forgotten Marx’s practicality: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways: the point, however, is to change it.”[1]  They are glued daily to ‘Democracy  Now’ where they participate ‘virtual’ revolution like children with joy sticks. Well, look behind you; the plutocrats are standing over you with baseball bats.


The problem is not ideological. The problem in the Black community is a practical cultural one. Practical culture is related to the central or core values which when internalized by a people influence their behavior.  It has nothing to do with moral ideology but rather with behaviors that work to serve the best interests of a group in the short and long term.


No one on the right or on the left has been or is willing to address the issue of practical culture. So neither the conservative or liberal proposals will engender solutions to the violent crime problem in African American neighborhoods.  And it is evident that African Americans as a whole can’t.


What both sides can and have been doing is generating short term economic and political profit or put another way ‘pimpin the problem’ for both partisan and private interests.  That is the ball game they play at the expense of many people who fret for a change for the better in the African American community.  Their pimpin of the problem must stop!



The ‘Black on Black’ homicide and general violent crime rate is positively correlated with the total fertility rate of African American women 15 to 45, inclusive.   The African American total fertility rate now is 1.9 and the trend, starting in 1970, is that it will continue to decrease due to cultural momentum.[2]  Therefore, ‘Black on Black homicide will drastically decrease within 5 and 10 years or by 2023.  Its that simple.


For example, in the city Oakland California the year with the lowest homicide rate over the last forty-four (44) years is 60 in 1999.  Prior to that year, the lowest homicide rate was 66, in 1970.  At no time has the homicide rate in Oakland gone below 60 in 44 years. It has gone as high as 165 in one year.


The average number of homicides in Oakland per year is 109 within a 44 year period beginning in 1969.  Over that same time span the first wave of people born between 1946 and 1964 reached their 15th birthday in 1961 thereafter and for 19 years the number of those aged between 15 and 24 increased until 1979.  In 1988, the last wave of that baby boom generation born in 1964 reached the age of 24.


The United States Bureau of the Census demonstrates that between 1960 and 1975 there was a 25% increase in the population of African Americans aged 15 to 24.  This was the result of a total fertility rate of between 6 to 4.5 babies per African American female with an age range of 15 to 45 years of age between 1946 and 1960. 


You can see the crime rate and the prison incarceration rate of persons coming out of Oakland California start to increase during that very same time period beginning in 1972. It was the result of a conservative political argument called ‘get tough on crime’.


In 1972, the California Department of Rehabilitation started to modify its prisons’ infrastructures for more maximum security inmates. This process began at a time when the politicians in Sacramento had done their math and knew the demographic changes that were coming.  After all, they had blown open the social dike in urban areas that caused the flood of violence.


Evidence in support of my hypothesis is a fact reported in the Contra Costa Times: “…demographic forces reshaping the nation’s inner cities are having a profound effect on Oakland’s schools, particularly those in West Oakland.  Since 2000, the combined enrollment of public, noncharter schools in the area has plunged by more than 60 percent.” The article goes on to state that declines of African American school age children up to 20% have occurred in other cities as well.[3]


Therefore, even if general socio-economic conditions for African Americans remain what they are now or even worsen over the next ten (10) years, I predict that within five (5) to ten (10) years the ‘Black on Black’ homicide rate will drastically decline because of a precipitous decline in the African American total fertility rate and the consequent reduction in persons between the ages 15 to 24, inclusive.  Its too bad that the majority of African Americans are not interested in changing their culture because even though the homicide and violent crime rate will drop on a broader scale it portends an omega moment for African Americans.

[1] Karl Marx, The German Ideology

[2] Definition: Cultural momentum means the collective sentiment of a group and is characterized by measurable group behavior in relation to one or more values by time.

[3] Katy Murphy, Noticeable decline in school-age children in West Oakland, Contra Costa Times, 02/12/2012