Naacp - Page 6

NinjaPoodle · #1 02-02-2010, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 06pilot

I agree with your S.O. If you aren't some famous person or a politicians, the NAACP has no time for you.

But also, I have a big problem with the NAACP, the SCLC, and the Concerned Black Clergy. Besides the previous comments about them not being proactive but reactive, what are they about?

The ONLY time I see them on TV is when a white person does something bad to a black person. They will be the first ones all mad on TV. But, in our community we have a large number of young girls having multiple babies out of wedlock. I don't see the NAACP coming on TV getting mad about that. We have an outrageous number of black on black crime in the inner city. I don't see the NAACP getting on TV mad about that. And what about gangs and trying to stop these young boys from even getting into gangs? Again, haven't heard from the NAACP on that issue. BUT as soon as a white person says the N word or attacks a black person, there is the NAACP all up on the TV. If they truly cared about the black community they would be doing something to stop all the ills we have in our community. They may talk a good game but I haven't seen the action.

Plus, Black people are always preaching equality and diversity and acceptance so why do we still support an organization in the 21st century that has as its title the advancement of one particular race? Isn't that what our ancestors were fighting against discrimination and the singling out of one race yet we do it ourselves. I don't get that concept either. You cant fight civil rights in the 21st century with 1960's tactics.

Thank you for pointing that out. I really wish they could move with the times and be a more relevant & useful organization.

06pilot · #2 02-03-2010, 01:40 AM

I wish they would be a more inclusive organization and fight for the rights of whites being discriminated against as well as blacks. We talk about an equal and fair society. MLK taught that it takes two to fight. So what are WE doing to tie the racial bonds in America? Are we helping the cause or further dividing ourselves? Michael jackson has a song that goes "I'm starting with the man in the mirrior? Tooo many people are ready to place fault on "that guy" and fail to look at themselves.

DrPhil · #3 02-03-2010, 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 06pilot

I wish they would be a more inclusive organization and fight for the rights of whites being discriminated against as well as blacks. We talk about an equal and fair society.

Equality is equality, but let the record show that whites as the population and power majority have plenty of organizations that formally and informally fight for their rights (even under the guise of "American rights," "employee's rights," and any other mainstreamed/generalized entity---since many people still consider whites to be a race-neutral group). That's one of the founding points of organizations that represent minorities on the bases of race, social class, gender, sexual orientation, etc.

Either way, the mission statement, vision statement, and purpose are very inclusive: http://www.naacp.org/about/mission/index.htm

General statement that isn't based on assumptions regarding anyone in this thread's level of contributing:
If people feel the NAACP isn't fulfilling its inclusivity or anything else, they should contribute locally and/or nationally. As with our GLOs, very little gets accomplished from the outside looking in and every org is only as strong as its membership.

ladygreek · #4 02-03-2010, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 06pilot

I agree with your S.O. If you arent some famus person or a politicians, the NAACP has no time for you.

But also, I have a big problem withthe NAACP, the SCLC, and the Concrned Black Clergy. Besides the previous comments about themnot being proactive but reactive, what are they about?

The ONLYtime I see them on TV is when a white person does something bad to a black person. They wil be the first ones all mad onTV. But, inour community we have a large number of young girsl having multiple babies out of wedlock. I dont see the NAACP comming on TV getting mad about that. We have an outrageous number of black on black crime inthe inner city.I dont see the NAACP getting onTV mad about that. And what about gangs and trying to stop these young boys from even getting into gangs? Again, havent heard from the NAACP on that issue. BUT as soon as a white person says the N word or attacks a black person, there is the NAACP all up on the TV. If they truly cared about the black community they would be doing something to stop al the ills we have in our community. They may talk a good game but I havent seen the action.

Plus, Black people are always preaching equality and diversity and acceptance so why do we stil support an organizationinthe 21st century that has as its title the advancement of one particular race? Isnt that what out ancesters were fighting against. discrimination and the singling out of one reae Yet we do it ourselves. I dont get that concept either. You cant fight civil rights in the 21st century with 1960's tactics.

White privilege still exists, thus the need for the continued "advancement" of people of color.

I find it interesting that you picked that out of the name when most people I know do not like the use of Colored. The NAACP had that discussion years ago and because of the identity associated with the name chose to keep it. What is has done is brand it as the NAACP not the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. This is what 3M did with its shortened name when it grew past being just Minnesota Mining and Manaufacturing.

Unlike the Urban League, the NAACP on local levels is a volunteer organization. It is what its members (volunteers) make it. So join your local chapter (and get your friends to do so, too) and help it be what you would like to see it be. It is always easier to criticize from the outside looking in.

06pilot · #5 02-06-2010, 01:55 AM

DrPhil and Ladygreek,

You make good points. But remember A mission statement is one thinhg, the actual missions carried out can be totally different.

You are right though. I have thouight about joining thr local NAACP chapter.

DrPhil · #6 02-06-2010, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 06pilot

But remember A mission statement is one thinhg, the actual missions carried out can be totally different.

And I see it being carried out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 06pilot

You are right though. I have thouight about joining thr local NAACP chapter.

Do that before you talk about missions being carried out.

Righteous_Kamal · #7 02-06-2010, 09:54 AM

Peace all,

My apologies if this is not the appropriate thread for my question but I have been torn between deciding to join the NAACP and the Urban League. Are any of you members of both?

DrPhil · #8 02-06-2010, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Righteous_Kamal

Are any of you members of both?

Yes.

ladygreek · #9 02-06-2010, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Righteous_Kamal

Peace all,

My apologies if this is not the appropriate thread for my question but I have been torn between deciding to join the NAACP and the Urban League. Are any of you members of both?

They are not mutually exclusive. Read my post to see the differences. Membership in the UL is not like that in the NAACP. It does not meet to vote on the board of directors. Nor does it elect the president (executive director) of the local org. It is a direct social services agency and the memberships are really tax-deductible donations.

I suggest you read the websites of both orgs.

Senusret I · #10 02-07-2010, 07:41 PM

I'm a member of neither. I'm okay with that.

There is nothing wrong with either org to me. I sorta like the Urban League a little better. It's more visible in my city. The NAACP is there, too, but for the reasons described above, I understand why I see the Greater Washington Urban League more.

Random: When I was fresh out of college, I considered joining the Thursday Network (the young professional auxilliary) but I dunno..... it seemed a little "stepping-stonish." Not really the kinds of people I wanted to be around.

And the NAACP chapter, I went to their annual gala and it seemed a little.... Thurston Howell III-ish.

Big ups to them in general though.

NinjaPoodle · #11 02-07-2010, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senusret I

I'm a member of neither. I'm okay with that.

There is nothing wrong with either org to me. I sorta like the Urban League a little better. It's more visible in my city. The NAACP is there, too, but for the reasons described above, I understand why I see the Greater Washington Urban League more.

Random: When I was fresh out of college, I considered joining the Thursday Network (the young professional auxilliary) but I dunno..... it seemed a little "stepping-stonish." Not really the kinds of people I wanted to be around.

And the NAACP chapter, I went to their annual gala and it seemed a little.... Thurston Howell III-ish.

Big ups to them in general though.

LOL!

Professor · #12 02-08-2010, 10:00 AM

LOL - "Thurston Howell III-ish". I have to remember to say this at the convention - I agree with you. Often, I think I'm the youngest person in meetings and was the youngest on the state executive committee.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senusret I

I'm a member of neither. I'm okay with that.

There is nothing wrong with either org to me. I sorta like the Urban League a little better. It's more visible in my city. The NAACP is there, too, but for the reasons described above, I understand why I see the Greater Washington Urban League more.

Random: When I was fresh out of college, I considered joining the Thursday Network (the young professional auxilliary) but I dunno..... it seemed a little "stepping-stonish." Not really the kinds of people I wanted to be around.

And the NAACP chapter, I went to their annual gala and it seemed a little.... Thurston Howell III-ish.

Big ups to them in general though.

NinjaPoodle · #13 03-01-2010, 07:28 PM

Ok, so I picked up the Oakland Post this past Saturday an read that thing's are-a-changing. Ms. Roslyn M. Brock(44) has been elected to succeed Julian Bond (70). She is the 4th woman and the 1st of the post civil rights era to take the position. Naturally I went to the NAACP website to read more:

http://www.naacp.org/news/press/2010-02-20/index.htm

One of the things I read in the paper was her being quick to let her support of the Urban League, The Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, and other orgs "to advance our common agenda". She was quoted as saying "there is a misconception that the NAACP is a Black organization. It is not. It's a multi-racial, multi-ethnic organization. Our title 'People of color' or 'colored people' really speaks to those who are falling through the cracks, who feel locked out, our desire is to cast out our net broader".

So, it seems that the NAACP may be brought into this century in goals, attitude & actions. Time will tell.

Professor · #14 03-02-2010, 09:34 AM

I don't think Sister Brock has said anything that other persons engaged in the organization has said (by the way - she is a member of Alpha Kappa Alpha).

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinjaPoodle

Ok, so I picked up the Oakland Post this past Saturday an read that thing's are-a-changing. Ms. Roslyn M. Brock(44) has been elected to succeed Julian Bond (70). She is the 4th woman and the 1st of the post civil rights era to take the position. Naturally I went to the NAACP website to read more:

http://www.naacp.org/news/press/2010-02-20/index.htm

One of the things I read in the paper was her being quick to let her support of the Urban League, The Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, and other orgs "to advance our common agenda". She was quoted as saying "there is a misconception that the NAACP is a Black organization. It is not. It's a multi-racial, multi-ethnic organization. Our title 'People of color' or 'colored people' really speaks to those who are falling through the cracks, who feel locked out, our desire is to cast out our net broader".

So, it seems that the NAACP may be brought into this century in goals, attitude & actions. Time will tell.

BluPhire · #15 03-03-2010, 01:31 PM

Hmm just to throw in my two cents.

Because politically I do not agree with the NAACP. Does that mean I am a Republican...oh no not the case. I'm just a firm believer that no organization that will do any good for our community should be in bed with any political party and from what I see the NAACP has yet to make it to that point where we can hear differences of opinion and not go in attack mode because they do not agree with the beliefs of Black conservatives. (I know that is about to open a door, but I actually want that door opened.) We need to get to the point of, "Yes I may not agree, but I recognize that we are both striving for the same goal."

I'll stick with 100 Black Men and keep it in the community.