Racism? You be the judge...

[AKA2D '91]

White SCLC Member Alleges Racism
02/21/2002 12:50 AM EDT
By CHRIS KAHN
The Associated Press

ROANOKE, Va. (AP) - A white member of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference is accusing the civil rights organization of racism after board members withdrew their recommendation that he lead the Virginia chapter.

Jack Mills, 70, who wants to become the SCLC's first white state president, said the historically black organization founded by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1957 turned on him after some members could not stomach the notion that he would be their leader.

"This is interesting," Mills said. "I've learned that black bigots can be as bad as white bigots."

The Rev. William Avon Keen, who has been appointed the Virginia SCLC's interim president, said the dispute with Mills has nothing to do with reverse racism. Keen said the Virginia board withdrew its support a few weeks ago after Mills prematurely tried to take control and taunted former president Curtis Harris in a letter by telling him to back off.

"There's just some things that this organization expects as far as your character," Keen said.

The SCLC has never had a white president of any of its state chapters or the national organization.

Mills, a former stuntman and skydiver, received the Virginia board's recommendation on Jan. 12, edging Keen by two votes.

The board planned to forward its recommendation to the chapter convention in May, where the organization's hundreds of members are scheduled to elect the next president. But Mills immediately sought to take control, calling a news conference to announce his election.

Members also were shocked when Mills sent Harris a letter calling himself a "prophet to be an inspiration for poor people." Mills urged Harris to retire, finishing his rambling letter with a quotation from Muhammad Ali: "Know this - I float like a butterfly and sting like a bee."

"I thought he had lost his mind," said Milton A. Reid, who founded the Virginia chapter in 1961. "And I may not be too far wrong."

Reid wrote Mills an angry letter in response, saying Mills' letter sounded "like a threat from the 'Klan'."

"I will strongly oppose your leadership to the presidency," Reid wrote. "My God! If we have to contend with this as an alleged former Klansman, what can we expect in the future?" Reid said other SCLC members told him that Mills had confessed he once belonged to the KKK "to show how far he's come." Mills said that his uncle was a member of the KKK in the 1930s, but that he has had no personal involvement with the group or recent contact with his uncle.

Mills, a lanky Iowa native who wears a cowboy hat, joined the SCLC several years ago after changing his mind about King. Mills said he once believed the FBI when it suspected King of communist sympathies. But he said his opinion changed after the disastrous 1995 federal raid on the cult near Waco, Texas. He said he has been trying to "make up for lost time" ever since.

While leading the SCLC's local chapter in Bedford County, Mills has worked to get computers for needy children. He fought to get what he considered a racist picture removed from the lobby of a state child support agency in Lynchburg.

"He's done more to advance civil rights in this area than anyone," said the Rev. Claude Gunn, a minister from Lynchburg who joined the SCLC at Mills' urging. "He is controversial, but he'll take on issues that other people won't." Gunn, who is black, said he believes that Mills lost the SCLC's support because of his color. "I went to this breakfast honoring Dr. King in January and people were talking about how the board had voted for Jack," Gunn said. "Someone said, 'Who is Jack Mills?' and when Jack stood up - and he's the only white guy there - you could tell things had changed."

The Virginia SCLC is led by some of the same activists who helped desegregate the state's schools 40 years ago. The chapter has had only three presidents in the past.

Mills maintains that he is now the Virginia SCLC president and said he may go to court to resolve the issue. Mills also plans to attend the convention in Danville.

[Honeykiss1974]

I dunno, but this Mills character sounds like he has "something to prove". Whether that somethings is proving how mucg is has change, proving that black people are racist, or whatever, but something about his whole manner and behavior in this situation is questionable. I mean, what's up with the letter? This is the SCLC right, and not the 7th grade student body election? I would expect someone after a position of such as president to act better than that.

[brainzandbeauty]

It is a new day entirely if this man thinks he can waltz into a courtroom and demand that he lead this organization. Reverse racism huh? I just love the way he is using typical right-wing conservative rhetoric to justify his case...

Like I said, I'm through!

[RacizmSux]

Thats' defenattly racizm!!!!!!!!!

[ChaosDST]

HOW PROFOUND...care to expand on that thought?

Originally posted by RacizmSux
Thats' defenattly racizm!!!!!!!!!

[ChaosDST]

Well, I would like to start off by saying that in America, there's no such thing as Black people "racism." Racism requires POWER, which we don't have in comparison to the majority. We SHOULD have the power, but that topic is saved for another day. Blacks can be prejudiced and bigoted, but not racist.
Now, in this instance, the Blacks were in more of a power position than Mills...but I think that rejecting a former Klansman is justifiable...even if he "floats like a butterfly and stings like a bee." Uh...was that an attempt to act "familiar" with Black culture or something (just a question)?
I think their decision is similar to a predominently white Christian organization not wanting to be led by a former Black Panther Party Member. Although Black Panthers and Klansmen are vastly different---these are examples of some former affiliations that will always make another race weary of your presence and of your leadership. If Mills wants to prove that he has changed he should be a dedicated member to that organization, he shouldn't prove his change by filing a lawsuit and trying to become their president.

[MsFoxyLoxy77]

Some are simply responding to the hand we as a people were dealth...that doesn't make negative recation right...Anywayz

This is not racism...this man seems to ride the fence to much..he thought King was involved with communists, he had affiliation with the Klan...Why does he really want to lead the org. I would rather bet on a sure thing and he's not IT.

[SoTrue1920]

Originally posted by ChaosDST
Well, I would like to start off by saying that in America, there's no such thing as Black people "racism." Racism requires POWER, which we don't have in comparison to the majority.

However, in the context of the SCLC where there have been no "white" people as leaders, couldn't it be said that African Americans hold the power in this situation?

[Kimmie1913]

Originally posted by SoTrue1920


However, in the context of the SCLC where there have been no "white" people as leaders, couldn't it be said that African Americans hold the power in this situation?

Well, the definition is really looking at power from a cultural standpoint rather than situation specific. There are always specific instances when an African American may exert some power however it is not the case in any systemic or widespread way. As with anything, it is really impossible for any of us to say what is going on without knowing all the facts. These are jus blips of information about the situation. If he did in fact send some kooky letter to the current president, if he did try to assume some sort of power prior to actually being elected, if he did seek to announce his presidency prior to being elected, I would have booted his a$$ black, white, whatever. That was out of line and does not bode well for what type of leader hr was likely to be.

[ChaosDST]

Along the lines of what Soror Kimmie1913 said, my qoute pertained to Amerikkka in general. Here's the rest of that thought...I'm adding it so you can see the full context of my statement: "Now, in this instance, the Blacks were in more of a power position than Mills...but I think that rejecting a former Klansman is justifiable..."


Greek Love

Originally posted by SoTrue1920


However, in the context of the SCLC where there have been no "white" people as leaders, couldn't it be said that African Americans hold the power in this situation?

[SoTrue1920]

Kimmie & Chaos -

I understood that your responses were taken from a societal standpoint, but isn't there ever a time that we can look at things on an individual, case-by-case basis than bringing in the whole of history in to play when making a decision?

This person wasn't out to take over all of SCLC. Now, from where I sit the guy looks like a kook. If the powers that be in this particular SCLC branch wanted to refuse him because they doubted his sincerity, or that he was a kook, then I fully support them. However, if any other white person (say, Morris Dees for example) came forth and sought not only membership but leadership of the SCLC, I should hope that we wouldn't use the same bigoted thinking that others have used in order to keep someone out just because of the colour of his/her skin.

Like Audre Lorde says, "The master's tools will not dismantle the master's house."

[ChaosDST]

I understand. However, we can NEVER afford to not take a societal standpoint, we are constantly setting precedents. Events in history were once individual, case by case bases. Fortunately, some people took the time to look beyond the current situations and see the present and future implications of them.
I agree that the guy looks like a kook, but I think that a kook is a kook, regardless of what color he/she is. Hopefully, an ignorant black person would not have been elected, either----difference is that even the most ignorant black person would not have been a member of the Klan, assuming the former is the lesser of the two evils.
Black people have always felt an obligation to see beyond color and instill justice across color/economic/religious barriers. If only others felt such an obligation, this world would be straight, right? Discrimination is not right coming from whites, blacks, or whoever...but in this specific individual, case by case instance...a definite message was sent. Without knowing ALL of the details, I'd say that one message was "we don't want a kooky ex-Klan member...."


Greek Love

Originally posted by SoTrue1920
Kimmie & Chaos -

I understood that your responses were taken from a societal standpoint, but isn't there ever a time that we can look at things on an individual, case-by-case basis than bringing in the whole of history in to play when making a decision?

This person wasn't out to take over all of SCLC. Now, from where I sit the guy looks like a kook. If the powers that be in this particular SCLC branch wanted to refuse him because they doubted his sincerity, or that he was a kook, then I fully support them. However, if any other white person (say, Morris Dees for example) came forth and sought not only membership but leadership of the SCLC, I should hope that we wouldn't use the same bigoted thinking that others have used in order to keep someone out just because of the colour of his/her skin.

Like Audre Lorde says, "The master's tools will not dismantle the master's house."

[SoTrue1920]

Valid points, Chaos. I think that we should always remember historical precedents, but at the same time, I think we need to be mindful of asking the right questions when situations like this arise, rather than just jumping to obvious conclusions. Asking whether or not something is really racism as opposed to an unintentional gaffe by someone who didn't know any better is an important lesson to learn. Not that this particular situation was an unintentional gaffe, but I think you know what I mean.

For me, I feel an obligation to be just in order to give people the benefit of the doubt. I don't do it because I expect others to live up to my example, nor because I want the same treatment from someone else. I do it because it is, for me the right thing to do. I don't want to live my life looking over my shoulder, regarding every single person with suspicion before I know whether they're deserving.

Originally posted by ChaosDST
I understand. However, we can NEVER afford to not take a societal standpoint, we are constantly setting precedents. Events in history were once individual, case by case bases. Fortunately, some people took the time to look beyond the current situations and see the present and future implications of them.
I agree that the guy looks like a kook, but I think that a kook is a kook, regardless of what color he/she is. Hopefully, an ignorant black person would not have been elected, either----difference is that even the most ignorant black person would not have been a member of the Klan, assuming the former is the lesser of the two evils.
Black people have always felt an obligation to see beyond color and instill justice across color/economic/religious barriers. If only others felt such an obligation, this world would be straight, right? Discrimination is not right coming from whites, blacks, or whoever...but in this specific individual, case by case instance...a definite message was sent. Without knowing ALL of the details, I'd say that one message was "we don't want a kooky ex-Klan member...."

[ChaosDST]

You're absolutely right. However, more often than not, your intuitions regarding people are correct. That person may take a little longer to behave suspiciously, but it comes out eventually. I do think that people have to be careful to jump to conclusions, because some things are not what they seem. In that case, I think that dialogue is crucial. Would you be inclined to give an ex-Klansman the benefit of the doubt?? I can't say that I would, but in religious organizations, people are supposed to let God be the judge because only God knows whether or not someone has changed and where their heart is. Speaking as a human, though...I would be one of the naysayers.

Originally posted by SoTrue1920
Valid points, Chaos. I think that we should always remember historical precedents, but at the same time, I think we need to be mindful of asking the right questions when situations like this arise, rather than just jumping to obvious conclusions. Asking whether or not something is really racism as opposed to an unintentional gaffe by someone who didn't know any better is an important lesson to learn. Not that this particular situation was an unintentional gaffe, but I think you know what I mean.

For me, I feel an obligation to be just in order to give people the benefit of the doubt. I don't do it because I expect others to live up to my example, nor because I want the same treatment from someone else. I do it because it is, for me the right thing to do. I don't want to live my life looking over my shoulder, regarding every single person with suspicion before I know whether they're deserving.