You’ve heard of John Henry haven’t you? John Henry was a steel driv’en man. He was a manual laborer. He was strong and tough,-a survivor.  Most of us have heard the ballad of John Henry. When pitted against a steam driven drill he was confident he would beat it.  But “…before the machine could beat him down John Henry hammered his fool self to death.” You should listen to the ballad of John Henry.


There is a moral to the folk ballad of John Henry which all African Americans and indeed all Americans should comprehend. A book written and published by Sidney M. Wilhelm in 1971 entitled: ‘Who Needs the Negro?’ will facilitate your understanding of the moral behind the ballad of John Henry.


Wilhelm’s basic thesis is that: “Negroes may enjoy equality insofar as they are first made economically irrelevant.”[1] African Americans finally achieved political equality under the law but at the same time for the past 50 years have not been cognizant of the fast pace of technological change taking place in the United States.  But this lack of  understanding is not surprising for some since most African Americans are not educated and do not have leadership at the local or national level to warn them of what is coming in the future.


What Wilhelm observed is that most African Americans came out of a work tradition of manual labor which required no technical training or expertise.  Three economic epochs define the economic necessity for ‘negro’ labor in the United States. All but one occurred in the 20th century. It is an ongoing tragedy of separation.


The first economic epoch was that of preindustrial agricultural labor intensive work or slavery primarily in the South; the second economic epoch was that of sharecropping under Jim Crow segregation in the South. It too was characterized by manual intensive labor.  The third economic epoch was that of unskilled industrial manual labor especially during World Wars I, II, and during the Vietnam war.  In each of those epochs, African American labor can be generally characterized as necessary unskilled ‘manual’ labor.  As such African Americans were wholly dependent upon the context or the where-ness and infrastructure of production or how production would be carried out.


Both the context and infrastructure of production began to change for African Americans when after 1945, the mechanical cotton picker and then later the mechanical tobacco harvester were applied to agricultural production in 1965. One of either of those machines could do the work of a 1000 workers in a day. The introduction of farm automation ended the need for manual farm labor in the south. Two things resulted from farm automation. One reality was that African Americans were no longer needed for manual labor in the South.  And two, automation caused the acceleration of a mass migration by African Americans out of a rural context into a city context. For a while the new city context for African Americans gave them respite, but not for long. The infrastructure of production was changing rapidly.


Wilhelm observed that as the urban African American population grew by 86% between 1954 and 1966 that parallel to that population growth there was a 50% growth of industrial and mercantile construction outside the core city. The unskilled jobs were taken out of the urban center where African Americans lived. This shift was a national phenomenon. For example it happened in Oakland California. Between 1950 and 1960, 100,000 Whites moved out of Oakland to surrounding suburbs. By the late 1970s manufacturing companies were also moving out of Oakland. It was by design. Not only was there an increase in industrial production outside of city centers but there was also an increase in automation in factories.


This brings another problem to the forefront. That problem is the lack of education and more specifically the training of African American youth into the vocations and sciences. The controversy begins at the turn of the 20th century. Then only one man argued that African American youth should be trained to master the trades and vocations. That man was Booker T. Washington.[2] He established the Tuskegee Normal and Industrial Institute in Alabama. But his idea was opposed by those who argued for liberal arts educational opportunities particularly for children of the talented 10th elite of which W.E.B. Dubois was a member.


Booker T. Washington’s idea was also opposed by those who argued for entrepreneurial and Black Nationalists’ agendas. Those two agendas were most aggressively pushed by Marcus Garvey.  Though there is some merit in both Dubois’ and Garvey’s strategies both Dubois’ and Garvey’s proposals, now tried and tested over 100 years, have been proven to be defective means for the social and economic improvement of African Americans.[3]


Wilhelm wrote in his book that just when the civil rights laws were enacted by Congress or by a Supreme Court Ruling to insure equal access to public schools and universities the standard for entry into those schools was elevated. For example, prior to 1968 there was no SAT test requirement for application to a University of California. Grade point average was the major criterion. The pattern is clear.  Just as the first wave of baby boomers started graduating from high schools in the mid and late 1960s the SAT test was introduced to eliminate minorities.  That was by design. That same method is now being proposed in 2013-14 to make the GED (General Education Test) test more difficult; that will affect ethnic minority chances to overcome failed high school experiences. More African Americans will fail to pass the test because of the pervasive weakness in mathematics among minorities.


By disqualifying African Americans by the use of standardized testing those minorities will be precluded from the training they need to compete for post-industrial jobs. The high school dropout rate for African Americans nationally is over 50% for men and 46% for women. Consequently, there are millions of unqualified African American high school drop-outs.


There is yet another problem. It is the problem of leadership or the lack thereof.  Today, civil rights law is not the central issue facing African Americans.  The problem is automation and the inability of millions of African Americans to retool their skills to compete within the post-industrial context. Liberal democrats will not speak in public of the issue while racist extremists and right wing republicans along with Tea Party advocates are pushing aggressively for privatization of Government. People they put before the public are silent on this issue, too. Those misleading public figures make the old argument for civil rights at a time when the law supports civil rights. But anyone who studies U.S. Labor Department Statistics will see the real issue of the day. They will see that there are 73 million unskilled workers in the job market. Of that number 4.5 million are African American. African Americans have the lowest paying jobs and belong to the most unstable families than any other group in the United States. Wilhelm states that African Americans are those who are increasingly ‘unnecessary’ in post-industrial America.


What Wilhelm did not see is that a last ditch effort would be made to make the ‘Negro’ economically necessary. First, the unskilled would find a new role as inmates in the prison industrial complex but not to work rather for government to justify increased taxation on citizens to support inmates who sit idle in prison and jail custody and to generate profit for corporate prison enterprises such as ‘Corrections Corporation of America’. Secondly, yet another way to make the Negro economically necessary was not foreseen by Wilhelm. This form of exploitation attaches to AFDC and Welfare income recipients to support small ghetto businesses which depend upon government entitlement money to survive. Here, too, as in the prison industrial complex there is no need for African Americans to be skilled or educated or to do any work at all. Just spend money. Both ghetto businesses and companies like ‘Corrections Corporation of America’ will fight tooth and nail to make the Negro economically necessary for their kinds of businesses. But they have one insurmountable problem and that is the demographic decline of African Americans over the next 46 years. Consequently, the general thesis of Wilhelm remains a cogent one.


Robotic technology is increasing at an accelerating pace. Factories and warehouses are employing robots run by computers to do the work that hundreds once did on a single shift. The cost for using robotic technology is cheaper than the cost for human labor.[4] The cost is even cheaper than what is paid to overseas workers. So, though we may see manufacturing return to the United States it will not be to hire unskilled Americans.


Unskilled African American workers are in the category of unnecessary. A humungous 72% of all African Americans with college degrees work for some form of Government. They too will be made ‘unnecessary’ because another post-industrial likelihood is the privatization of Governments at all levels. Look at Detroit as a model of a totally financially broke and dysfunctional Government.  Detroit will not be resurrected to it former form. Much of it will be privatized.


The United States Post office is another example of the privatization of Government movement. Already, as it stands it is partly privatized. In the years to come, it too will no doubt be completely privatized. Most State and City Governments are teetering on the edge of financial collapse and will seek alternative ways to govern and decrease expenditures due to shrinking tax revenue. Many of them will privatize departments and African Americans though educated will become ‘unnecessary’.  When Army and Naval military bases and hospitals closed in Oakland and Alameda, California during the 1980s and 90s that is exactly what happened. Thousands of African Americans lost their jobs. They too were unskilled for the post-industrial infrastructural changes.


Sidney Wilhelm ends his book with a very existential prediction. He states: “Under the economy of past technological configurations, it was incumbent upon White America to balance racial values against economic incentives. But with the introduction of automation, the necessity virtually disappears, since it is economically feasible to negate the traditional rational for the Negro’s existence. …the affected Negroes will not be so much abused as ignored. There will be no necessity to maintain measures of intimidation for purposes of economic returns as the Negro shifts from the economics of exploitation to the economics of uselessness.”[5] Later he states: “It is the double curse flung upon the Negro by White America to judge competency against the performance of a machine and the person by the color of their skin.” [6]


John Henry was a steel driv’en man. But John Henry died. His heart just popped wide open. His heart could not take the strain from competing with machines and he could not imagine, manufacture, and produce machines himself. John Henry did not have the foresight to see the age of automation.









[1] Sidney W. Wilhelm, Who Needs The Negro?,  Doubleday & Company, Garden City, New York, 1971, p.p. 265

[2] Booker T. Washington, The Future of The American Negro, 1899, Seashore Classics,

[3] The FBI undermined Marcus Garvey but realistically, it is very doubtful that it would have worked for the masses. For example, Liberia was purchased by President Madison in 1822. It was headed by ex-slaves and Free Blacks. But it became a plantation for American companies like Firestone, Inc. and the Liberian leaders were nothing but brutal dictators over African people.

[4]  60 minutes, Businesses Use More Automation, Fewer Workers, July 21, 2011, by Kelly Cobiella, CBS News

[5] Sidney M. Wilhelm, Who Needs The Negro, Doubleday & Company, Inc., Garden City, New York, 1971, pp. 223

[6] Ibid, pp 265


dead end

A dead end lies before us. It is being shown to us by the light of our history. When we study not only the structural characteristics of the institution of slavery but also the intestinal fortitude of millions of individual Africans, that history highlights for us what was for them the reason for their survival.  It also implies what will cause us to fail.


It is common knowledge that millions of slaves endured pain of every conceivable kind. They endured the pains of hunger, thirst, beatings, whippings, rape, the murder of kinfolk and neighbors, extreme cold, extreme heat, disease, humiliation, intellectual deprivation, high infant and maternal mortality rates, physical mutilation, forced incest, child sexual abuse, and lives lived under constant authoritarian repression.  They did so for hundreds of years.


But they endured. They endured because individually and collectively their will to live was greater than the sum of all resistance to them. For every act to suffocate their humanity their will to take in yet another breath of life prevailed.  In that breath which filled their lungs they exhaled into the world a universal movement that turned history in a new direction.


If there is an argument for a morality not born of the flesh but of the spirit, one which springs forth from what in a human being is soul alone, then it must be expressed as the greater ‘ will to live’ against the lesser ‘sum of all resistance’ to it. That being true then it must also be true that African people in America under a system of total repression were not only a moral people but they were also the major moral force shaping United States history for the 100 years following the civil war.   


Their ‘will to live’ has left a wide trail in its wake. That trail was paved by the descendants of slaves. They were those generations of people constituting millions upon millions of souls who in word and in deed shouted out to the world that ‘We Shall Over Come!’ And in their train along the span of that trail followed Asians, Latinos, Women, and all others who were raised from the dead by the cry of African people ‘Rise Lazarus!’ live and walk to freedom with us here in these United States.   


No rational person would argue that today we are on a moral and social upswing. Rather now, and in the light of our past, our future prospects as a people and as individual citizens are uncertain.  Serious questions should now be asked by each and every one of us. We should ask ourselves whether or not the scale of our moral measure has tipped against us? Is it now the case that our ‘will to live is outweighed by the sum of all resistance to it? 


The social facts in support of that proposition are frightening and are rubbed in our faces daily. Our collective moral sentiments have slid down a steep slope. And if those facts are true then what will become of us? What will become of us if we do not reinvigorate the intestinal fortitude our ancestors had?  If we agree that they are our moral frame of reference, it begs the question: are we now an immoral people?


Our behavior and words are moral forces. They are no different than fire for both our behaviors and words are energies, too.  They can cause combustion.  They are forces that move about and impact things and people around them. They have weight and can cause explosions. They can shatter things and people. They can cause implosions by destroying people psychologically. These forces move at a rate of speed like all things. They gather momentum and they can also accelerate when combined with other behaviors. For those reasons we are now headed to a point in our history when the light of our past shall be overcome by the darkness of an undetermined and uncertain future.


We are approaching a dead end and we are accelerating and gathering momentum along the way.  It is the kind of challenge like no other we have ever faced. For, it has been constructed by our own hands not by the hands of others and it stands before us within us.  Now, we are the sum of all resistance to ourselves. Now we behave as though we do not want to live. We do not comprehend that what we face cannot be overcome by colliding with it. We must stop before we collide with it.


That wide trail which was blazed by so many of our ancestors has now become a narrow beaten path along which we walk.  And if we look back over our shoulders we will see that no longer do others follow us. For we are no longer moral leaders; we no longer possess the high ground.  


Asians, Latinos, women, and others have parted ways and gone on to enjoy the fruits of their labor. We are now alone; we no longer cry out ‘Rise Lazarus!” rather we whine aloud with arms outstretched and with open palms.  What we are on my dear people is a death march. It may be that our time in the United States is coming to its end. For it is a social fact that we have hit rock bottom.  Denial of that fact will avail us nothing for ‘pride goeth before a fall’.


If there is hope then it must be hope in God and a visceral ‘will to live’. It must be the ‘will to live’ which our forebears had in such abundance that they could share it with the entire world. It must be that same intestinal fortitude which drove our people to do all that they could do to make a place for themselves and us in these United States against the sum of all resistance.







Misogyny and Sexism, by Dr. Steven Nur Ahmed

Book Cover Earthcolony

Chapter 4.1

Though the thesis of this book is limited in scope to that of the origin of modern racism in ancient mythology and classical philosophy, it is necessary to examine a line of reasoning that runs parallel to that of racism and is also rooted in the Torah creation mythology as well as it being rooted in Aristotle’s theory of gender differences. To examine those sources is important.  It is important for the same reasons we stated concerning institutionalized racism; that is because it, too, continues to have deep and widespread influence on the status and roles of women and the behavioral responses to women in both the western and middle-eastern worlds.  It is misogyny (hatred of women).

We have spent some time examining the ‘Genesis’ creation problem.  First it is a myth or a fictitious account of the origin of Homo-Sapiens, but though the subjects are false it is argued logically by some persons even though they have no evidence to support it as fact.  Furthermore, the creation myth presented in the Torah is inconsistent because there are two accounts of the creation of the first man and the first women.[1]  According to Friedman, those accounts were written by different persons at different times.  In chapter one, the male and female were created simultaneously: “…male and female created he them.”[2]  In chapter two of the same book, there is yet another account of the creation man and women.  This time the writer states that the first man and first women were created serially (one after the other).[3]  The fact that the two accounts are mythological does not prevent us from scrutinizing them from a sociological perspective because what we want to know is whether or not such myths are determinative in the formation of socio-economic inequality between men and women in our society today.

The woman, Eve, is made to be culpable for the fall from grace.  Her culpability is central to our analysis of the institutionalization of misogyny (hatred of women) in modern society.  Without doing a detailed analysis, let us summarize the Genesis narration. First, the woman was approached by ‘the serpent’; secondly, she took the fruit and ate it; thirdly, she was blamed by the man for having mislead him; fourthly; God blamed her for having committed an unlawful act; fifthly, the woman’s sorrows are multiplied by God including her conception and pregnancy; God further makes her subordinate to her man stating that: “…he shall rule over thee.”[4] The status and roles of women in Jewish culture conformed more or less to the expressed and implied definition of the first woman, Eve, in the creation myth.  From there and through cultural diffusion, that myth began its slow but steady progression in Europe and the middle-east through Christianity.

One very influential conduit of the myth of the divinely ordained subordination of women was written in 1486 by two Dominican Monks named Heinrich Kramer and James Sprenger.[5]  The thesis of their book is that Satan exist and that through human agency good person are seduced to evil.  The book defines the procedures for carrying out torture upon suspected witches.  We will not survey the entire work. For our purposes there are several sections which parallel the Genesis curse upon women and has become institutionalized in the Western world.

Let us first cite some quotations from the book and then analyze them. First in part 1 question 6 it states: “For learned men propound this reason; that there are three things in nature, the tongue, an ecclesiastic, and a woman which know no moderation in goodness or vice…”; “What else is woman but a foe to friendship, an un-escapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural temptation, a desirable detriment, an evil of nature, painted with fair colors.” And, “When a woman thinks alone she thinks evil.”;“…women are naturally more impressionable, and more ready to receive the influence of a disembodied spirit;…”; “Women are intellectually children.”; “She is more carnal than a man as is clear from her many carnal abominations.”; “And, it should be noted that there was a defect in the formation of the first women, since she was formed from a bent rib, that is, a rib of the breast, which is bent as it were in a contrary direction to a man. And since through this defect she is an imperfect animal, she always deceives.”[6]  These quotes, if believed, can compel the inference that women are defective, intellectually stunted, and distrustful.  Over time, such premises grow misogyny or hatred of women in both men and women.

The book concludes that torture is the only means by which such women can be cured of their predisposition to evil.  Here the point being made is that beating ‘evil’ women is for their own good and the good of the community.  Little wonder that well into the colonial period of American history wife beating was sanctioned at common law as a method of correction. This is evidenced by a statement by William Blackstone that it was an ancient custom which was generally accepted which permitted men to moderately chastise their wives as they would their servants or children.[7]

The Catholic Church was a major player in the establishment of the modern European western nations. Its cannon law influenced the development of secular legal institutions.  It laid the cultural foundation which gives to those nations a common identity and if not a contemporary identity then at least a historical one.  The moral values it established between the 4th and 16th centuries became institutionalized and thus came to be accepted as truth without question for many year into the 20th century.  It developed the themes set forth in the book of Genesis that women necessarily occupy a lower status and subservient roles to men and that the line differentiating the two genders must be maintained by force if necessary. Yet, there is another argument for female inferiority which originates in systematic philosophy.  To understand that argument we must turn to Greek philosophy in the 4th century B.C.

A non-Judeo-Christian element which buttressed and reinforced the creation myth in the Torah was present in Greek philosophy.  If we accept Friedman’s theory, then both the origin of Torah mythology and Platonic/Aristotelian gender views were contemporaneous in time. In the Greek philosophies, we find the first attempt to systematically present a theory supported more or less by objective evidence that women are inferior to men.  Of course, the evidence is ‘physical’ and we need only look to Aristotle to find the first inkling of what would in time be morphed into a full blown scientifically determined argument for the inferiority of women.

Now, let’s identify some of Aristotle’s theses regarding the natural and social status of women and the premises in support of those theses:  “…for the male is by nature better fitted to command than the female…”[8]; “…the one is the courage of command, and the other that of subordination…”[9]; and, lastly, “For the free rules the slave, the male the female…”[10] Here is a simple sketch of gender hierarchy. Note that it parallels the Torah myth of the curse put open women: “…and thy [your] desire shall be to thy [your] husband, and he shall rule over thee [you].”[11]  What differs between Aristotle’s argument for the inferiority of women and the Genesis myth is that Aristotle ‘supports’ his theses with physical evidence.  However, they both come together in the same conclusion that a woman’s status and her roles in society are inferior to that of man by law of nature or necessity.  It can never be changed.

The physical evidence which Aristotle posits is laid out in his book: ‘History of Animals’.  Therein he lays out a biological function which relegates women to the lower tier of gender relations.  He regards menstruation as an ‘ailment’ in women. He calls it ‘catamenia’. The Greek word ‘cata’ means ‘thrown’ and ‘menia’ means menses or moon.  Aristotle’s argument for female inferiority is more cogent because he correlates a physical condition to the phases of the moon.  It is a simple model implying basic assumptions about women which will be used by modern naturalists and anthropologists to rationalize women’s less esteemed status and roles in modern society.

One modern scientist who makes a claim for female inferiority is Charles Darwin.  He states that women are analogous to lower races in that they are more emotional than intellectual. The superiority is the product of a higher intellect in man with corresponding less emotional orientation than what is in woman.  Thus, for Darwin there is a physical basis for the qualitative difference between men and women.  In fact, he says regarding woman’s intuition, imitation, and rapid perception that “…these faculties are characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a past and lower state of civilization.”[12]  Darwin goes one step farther in his argument for a physical basis underlying woman’s inferiority to man.  Rather than resting his theory on ‘menses’ alone he joins with it specific neurological functions that are supportive of intellectual abstraction but in and of themselves are less than the intellectual power of abstraction.  He may now deduce as though following of necessity the claim: “Thus, man has ultimately become superior to women.”[13]  The political, scientific, and religious foundation for institutionalized sexism was thus established upon the basis of myth, political injustice, and pseudo science.








[1] Richard Elliot Friedman, Who Wrote the Bible, San Francisco, Harper, 1987

[2] Genesis, 1:27

[3] Genesis, 2:7; 2:18-23

[4] Genesis, Chapter 3:16

[5] Heinrich Kramer and James Sprenger, Malleus Maleficarum, Malleus Maleficarum; The Witches Hammer, translated by Rev. Montague Summers, 1486

[6] Ibid, part 1, question 6

[7] Sir William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1765

[8] Aristotle, Politics  [BookI. 1259a1-2]]

[9] Ibid, [BookI. 1260a8]]

[10] Ibid, [BookI. v.5-8]

[11] Genesis 3:16

[12] Ibid

[13] Charles Darwin, Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection and the Descent of Man and Selection in relation to Sex,  Chapter 19,  pp. 566-567, Published by William Benton, Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., Great Books, 1952