Righteousness and Responsibilties

Peace! Paz!

Las matematicas de hoy son “comprendimiento y cifra”. Today’s mathematics is understanding cipher.

Understanding is the ability to see things for what they are, and not for what they ‘appear’ to be. This means that ones understanding or comprehension of a cipher (being a person, place or thing) is not superficial, as in an ‘opinion’, but rather it permeates the cipher’s entire being, looking not just into it but rather ‘through’ it, as if it were transparent. However, this does not mean that ones understanding negates everything within the length, width and height of a particular entity. It accounts for, reasons out, and concludes based upon the analysis of the individual and their discerned application (mental processing of acquired information and data). The conclusion? A mental clarity which allows for that person to interact with that person, place or thing and receive, as well as share, growth and development. Understanding is growth and development because once achieved (not everyone can ‘get’ an understanding) it stimulates and warrants the elevation of a person mentally, intellectually, morally, etc., as they forge themselves towards becoming a more complete human being.

It was this understanding or ‘clarity’ of the bio-chemical dimensions of man, the Original man, that lead a scientist (by the name of ‘Yakub’) to ultimately bring about a change in world history. This was done through the creation of the ‘white man’. Whether or not you subscribe to the theory of Yakub as revealed by the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, there are stories from many different Original cultures that describe the ‘white man’ as “unoriginal”, meaning ‘not from the beginning’, and have remarkable similarities and interconnectedness. Modern western science has revealed that the gene for “whiteness” is a mutation (as Scientist Keith Cheng of Penn State College of Medicine verified and revealed back in 2005) and which occurred a little over 6,000 years ago (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/316/5823/364a

The question is as to whether or not the mutation (genetic alteration) was instigated through nature (as in ‘evolution’) or the result of human determinates and scientific observation and application., being born through selective breeding, as the story of Yakub illustrates. There are those of us who are more likely to accept evolution, as in man gradually becoming lighter due to environmental factors. However, there are many examples, one of which being the Inuit, Buryat and Chukchi people of the Artic who retain a considerable amount of melanin and defy such theories. Otherwise they would have ‘evolved’ into ‘white people’ from being surrounded by snow and ice. Paul Lawrence Gutherie states in his book, “The Making of the Whiteman”, of evolutionist Charles Darwin:

“When Charles Darwin discussed the origins of race he too expressed the opinion that selection, over the course of many generations, had to have been used in bringing about what he called “the characteristic differences between the races of man”. He even went on to conclude that without some form of selective breeding, such racial differences simply “could not be accounted for in a satisfactory manner”.

So in reality, whether or not an “individual” named Yakub pulled this off (the selective breeding and creation of white people) is less important in contrast to the actuality of them being born through a selective process. It is the principle behind the story which is the most important and relative. Another important question would be “why?”, which is something to be discussed in another article. However, today’s degree in our lessons focuses on the fundamentals of the process and states:

30) Tell us, what and how the Devil was made?

Answer: The Devil was made from the Original people by grafting and separating the germs. In the black man’s body there exists two germs: a black germ and a brown germ. Yakub, with his law on birth control, separated the black germ from the brown germ and grafted it into white, by destroying the black germ. After following this process of 600 years, the germ became white and was no longer original. Also, by thinning the blood, the germ became weak and wicked and was no longer the same.

Thus, this is how Yakub made devil.

As we see, it was the understanding of the cipher (the Original man’s bio-chemical structure) which allowed Yakub to employ a policy of ‘separation‘, in order to fashion a being outside and away from the bounds of the nature in which humanity was conceived. This shouldn’t be a surprise considering Europeans track record around the planet with people of color (Original people). A policy of ‘divide’ (separate) and conquer, as well as their fascination with genetics and cloning (after all they were “made in our image and likeness“).

It was through the primary principle of ‘division’ that Yakub had achieved his means. For as Europeans traversed the globe they set out to both divide up peoples’, families, etc., and as well separate man from nature in their pursuit for material happiness. Interestingly enough, the later goal seemed to be an ‘ancestral memory’ of sorts, lodged deep in their DNA, since they in fact are ‘made’ and not ‘natural’, that is ‘occurring within nature’. Our peoples were shocked to see a people whose skin color couldn’t be found to resemble any soil they had seen. Our mercifulness and humanity accepted them as part of the human families, even after 514 years of conquest. Yet they continued to and ‘continue’ to divide the Original people- the black from the brown, the brown from the yellow. However, their reality was conceived in thought by an Original man- Yakub. This means that the devilishment that they have committed was a reflection of the mental reality being exhibited by Original people prior to their existence. They, being the material or physical manifestation of the same mindset. For we had long been warring with each other at points in history, tribe against tribe, kingdom against kingdom, exhibiting little understanding in the cipher for and of each other.

It wasn’t until our Father, Allah, the founder of the Nation of Gods and Earths (the 5%ers), brings a supreme understanding into the world (cipher). It was Allah’s intention (will) to end religion, raise up the children and unite the seeds- black, brown and yellow (“red” being a variation or shade of brown) as one. As well as unite the human families- the Original peoples with the Colored (meaning distorted from it’s original state) or ‘white’ people, through a bond of education, love (the highest form of understanding) and righteousness, by bringing us out of “hell” with the teachings of Supreme Mathematics.

Black, Brown, Yellow, White

Knowledge, Wisdom, Understanding, Culture…(Supreme Mathematics)


1+2+3+4=10 (there are 10 digits in our number system, 1-9 plus 0. The number “10” is just “1+0” which equals “1”.)

“Oneness” is unification and Allah is “one”. Allah advocated unification in a time where it was very unpopular, considering the number of so-called black “militants” seeking separation from “white society”. He was called an “Uncle Tom” because of his work with the city government of New York and the Mayor aide Barry Gotherer. He vocalized the idea and need for “black and whites” to unite and be “civilized”. After all, we understood them to be a part of the human families regards to the atrocities of history and the then current state of society. Allah said that all things must “change or die”. He focused on the “change”.

We desire to reach and teach our white brothers and sisters of the human families. As long as they desire harmony and righteousness. For acceptance of our way of life means certain responsibilities become incumbent upon them. We have long allowed them to learn and do like the Original man, coming amongst us. Two films I recently had the chance to see illustrate such. The first was a more contemporary film entitled “Pathfinder”. It is about a young Viking/Norse boy who is abandoned during an early Viking expedition in North America, 600 years before Columbus. The Vikings sought to settle the new land but not before killing and enslaving the Indigenous people. The boy is abandoned because he refuses to participate and is left to die, only to be saved by a Wampanoag woman who takes the boy amongst her people to live and be raised. As time passes the boy soon has to confront “himself” and take a stand against the returning murderous Viking expedition. The second film was an older one from 1957 entitled “Pawnee”. Similarly, a white boy, this time a ‘settler’, was reared amongst the Pawnee people, only later to confront his ‘own people’ as droves of white settlers attempted to steal “Indian” lands on their migration westward. Both themes echo “Dances with Wolves”, a movie starring actor Kevin Costner, which came out in the early 1990’s. However, the story behind “Dances with Wolves” focused on an adult and Union Army officer (Costner) and his experiences living amongst the Lakota Nation. The officer is given a Lakota name which meant “Dances with Wolves” and soon found himself defending the Lakota against the encroaching “white” army.

The underlying principle behind each movie was the responsibility given and choice they had to make when confronted by ‘their own’. Allowed to come and live amongst us, respected and love as one of ‘our own’, their responsibility was then to uphold the way of living that gave them life. Each had to make difficult decisions in defending that honor in the face of their own people (biologically), and succeeded.

Something very similar occurs in our present society, when white people empathize with Original people. Growing up, my peers and I often used to comment on how some white people may want to listen to Hip-Hop music, wear baggy clothes, adopt and utilize some of our mannerisms, and “be like us” per se, but don’t want to accept being harassed, oppressed, and jailed like us. Many may empathize with “struggle” as there are many poor white families who experience the same conditions as us. Yet, the melody of the music changes when it comes to defending righteousness and revolution. It’s often easier to bond together with the realms of negativity and crime. It’s easier to parallel one’s self with the destruction of others if you are destroying yourself or are being destroyed. It’s more difficult for those white people who may have assisted the Black Panthers, actively supported the Civil Rights Movement or any black “cause”. Especially, those who willingly accept the teachings of Allah and his Five Percenters. Many are attracted to the principles of self-mastery and internal development, refutation of religion and a way of life predicated on being in harmony with the mathematical order and of the universe. However, one can not accept the positive without a willingness to accept the negative. Throughout periods in history we have been viewed very favorably in the eyes of the masses and the government authorities, been considered a gang even and slandered with conservative media accusations of being linked with Al-Qaida. The perspective about us will change with the audience. So to walk this path is not easy and is a sacrifice, one that is expected, in exchange for the life-giving teachings bestowed upon those who become Five Percenters. Especially “white Five Percenters”, like the First Born Caucasian 5%er- Azrael, taught directly by Allah. White Five Percenters or white people in general, who align with black struggle become quite unpopular in white social circles and in many cases become what Chicago Black Panther Fred Hampton referred to as “class suicide”. The ultimately risk forfeiting all of the luxuries and benefits of accepting and perpetuating Euro-centrism in this country. They fail to uphold the status quo of white supremacy.

The films I mentioned show a clear parallel for our current situation. As the Nation continues to grow from it’s 1964 Harlem roots, more and more people across the world, from every one of the human families will be exposed and many will want to add on. It is integral for a European or European descendant to strive for an understanding of the cipher. Both of themselves and their role in the struggle and the Nation of Gods and Earths and a clear perspective of what it means to uphold the teachings of Allah and his Suns and Daughters.



Allah and Indigenous “Anarchy”

As a nation, we the Gods and Earths do not have any specific political outlook. As a collective, we are apolitical. This can turn into ‘apathy’ without the proper education. We are not a religion nor or we an ‘organization’. We are a ‘nation’ of men, women and children who live according to some basic esoteric teachings, taught and understood through their parallel with mathematical and alphabetic principles defined by our founder, Allah. However, we can not be strangers to organization. We have organization, really only visible to those ‘within’ the culture.

Allah could have been considering a patriot. He was more a champion for education and ‘civilization’. By civilization I mean the forward progression of ‘Man’ and his abilities to master himself and what he produces through space and time. While other black groups, so called ‘militants’, were concerned with bringing down the white establishment, Allah worked hand in hand with Major John V. Lindsay and his aid, Barry Gotherer. Allah secured airplane rides, bus trips to Bear Mountain, trips to the beach and a host of other activities for his young Five Percenters, courtesy of the “city of New York”. While many radicals dismiss these services and the funds allocated for them as mere ploys from the city government, Allah didn’t care. Allah was focused on his “fruit” and making sure they had the best, considering they came from having ‘nothing’. Allah wasn’t a democrat or republican. He was simply familiar with the laws of the land. He was a hustler and knew how to get what he needed. Especially when it came to the youth. He was more concerned with sending children to college that ‘separating’ them from all that society could offer them. They were already separating because they were poor and black. And by “society could offer them” I mean an education and advancement in society. And he did this, on his terms. He didn’t teach the children to hide who they were or sacrifice his teachings just so they could “pass” through society. Allah instilled in them a respect for the American flag and the government, yet made distinctions as to certain laws to acknowledge and obey, as long as they didn’t conflict with ‘our’ laws. He didn’t advocate marriage under the government nor did he recognize the government’s authority to ‘tell’ or someone who they are or define them. He called himself Allah and didn’t care who liked it. He even represented himself as “Allah” in front of the judge prior to going to Bellevue and Mattewan State Hospital.

Allah would work with anyone who could help him further his agenda for his sons and daughters. And by virtue of interacting and meeting compromises with city and government officials he was ‘political’. Irregardless to how some may feel about it.

Allah taught us to be leaders and therefore we have no ‘central’ lead figure. Yet, we do have leadership. Those qualified with moving forward with certain issues and actions. We have no hierarchy, except between the ‘best knower’ and those ‘seeking to know’. Which means, I will openly accept direction and suggestions from someone who ‘knows’ more than me or is more qualified in a certain area. Allah freed us from hierarchy by revealing to us the reality of GOD, and that being every Original man. Thus, each man is the ruler of his own life and universe (family). With no external force or entity having dominion over ones’ self. This concept is very ‘anarchist’. And by ‘anarchist’ I do not mean “chaotic” but in the original context and meaning of the word. Many of us, in our quest to free ourselves from the shackles of society-one being labels, are so opposed to many words and ‘labels’ just due to their Eurocentric origin alone. However, there is truth in all things.

Look at their breakdown of society: 10 percent of the population rules by deceiving 85 percent into believing in a false mystery god that doesn’t exist. The remaining 5 percent reject the lies of this evil 10 percent (the priests, imams, etc.). So when they say they’re God, it’s almost like an anarchist view of religion. Faced with the bullshit of organized religion, the anarchist says, “no gods, no masters.” Reacting to the same bullshit, the Five Percenter says, “I God, I Master.” This can be very empowering.”- interview with author, Michael Muhammad Knight, on “Waking the Midnight Sun” blog

Since, we are ‘apolitical’ and being endowed with the ability of ‘free thought and action’, each citizen of the Nation of Gods and Earths has the right to chose for themselves their specific political outlook. Some are more conservative, some are more democratic. I, personally, am a self-proclaimed “anarcho-socialist”. I’ve identify the relevancy of Socialism within the context of 120 degrees due to certain concepts within the lessons. For example, the 8th degree in the 1-14:

Why does the Devil keep our people apart from their own social equality?”
Ans: Because he is filthy in all his affairs. He is afraid that once we learn about him we will run him from amongst us. Social means to advocate a society of men or group of men for one common cause. Equality means to be equal in everything.

Socialism means, for me, that social issues and responsible are of a greater importance to the longevity and welfare of a society than capital. Yet and still, regardless to what one’s political outlook may be, we must still be familiar with the principles of capitalism and adept in it to some degree in order to survive in ‘this’ society. To be ‘socialist’ to many is to give all power to the state, which isn’t the reality. That may have been a ‘Eurocentric’ perspective and application of ‘socialism’ but it’s different from what Hugo Chavez is attempting in Venezuela and what Daniel Ortega is doing in Nicaragua by the creation and perpetuation of communal councils. The adoption of these councils gives more power to the people and is considered ‘democracy’ by the western world. Democracy, as defined through it’s Greek origin, means to “rule by the people”. The United States is far from that. And so was Greece, a slave-based economy and society. Yet, that definition of democracy is what “anarchy” really is and means. Within the Nation of Gods and Earths, each city or cipher agrees (collectively) on particular policy in that city. Within each man’s home, he decides the rules and policy of how the house is run. And this, whether acknowledged by the majority or not, is ‘anarchism’. Our internal structure is very anarchistic and an understanding of this will allow a citizen within the nation to identify the process and channels of change here and how to harness this seemingly “lack of organization” and transform it into productivity. As opposed to feeling like no one is ‘listening to them’ and that they are against the odds. This is coming from someone who was involved with the original Growth and Development proposition and the establishing of regions and regional conferences within the nation. An anarchist styled proposition fortifying individual rights and merging/balancing with collective responsibilities, in and of itself. Not ‘anarchist’ in that we are striving to overthrow the government. “Anarchist” in that we seek to gather of collective resources and network these resources in order to create the best possible quality of life for ourselves and our children. Ruling over ourselves and our ‘destiny’.

Below, I can included an excerpt from Jack Weatherford’s book “Indian Givers: How The Indians of the Americas Transformed The World”, to bring forth further understanding of where the term “anarchy” come from. Please Read on. Do the knowledge…

To an outsider, such powwows often appear chaotic. Even though posted signs promise that the dances will begin at four o’clock, there is still no dancing at five-thirty. Drummers scheduled to play never arrive, and some groups drum without being on the program. Impromptu family ceremonies intertwine with the official scheduled events, and the microphone passes among a score of announcers during the evening. No one is in control. (Sounds very similar to a Universal Parliament.)

This seems to be typical of Indian community events: no one is in control. No master of ceremonies tells everyone what to do, and no one orders the dancers to appear. The announcer acts as herald or possibly as facilitator of ceremonies, but no chief rises to demand anything of anyone. The event flows in an orderly fashion like hundreds of powwows before it, but leaders can only lead by example, by pleas, or by exhortations. Everyone shows great respect for elders and for warriors, who are repeatedly singled out for recognition, but at the same time children receive great respect for dancing and even the audience receives praise for watching.” - page 120 and 121

Further more….

“Writing a little later in the sixteenth century, the French essayist Michel de Montaigne presented a similar description of American Indian life based primarily on the early reports from Brazil. In his essay “On Cannibals,” Montaigne wrote that they are “still governed by natural laws and very little corrupted by our own.” He specifically cited their lack of magistrates, forced services, riches, poverty, and inheritance. As in More’s utopia, Brazil, emerged as the ideal place and Indians as having created the ideal society [Montaigne, pp. 109-10]. Most of these early writings contained strongly satirical veins- the writers indicated that even the so-called savages lives better than civilized Europeans- but the satire grew out of the unavoidable truth that the technologically simple Indians usually lived in more just, equitable, and egalitarian social conditions.

Not until a century after Montaigne did the first French ethnography on the North American Indians appear. Louis Armand de Lom d’Arce, Baron de Lahontan, wrote several short books on the Huron Indians of Canada based on his stay with them from 1683 to 1694. An adventurer far more than an anthropologist, Lahontan nevertheless managed to rise above the genre of adventure stories to give the French reader the worldview of the Hurons from inside the Indian mind. By the time of Lahontan’s sojourn among the Hurons, they had already survived several decades of sporadic interaction with European explorers and traders, and they had been the subject of numerous commentaries by Jesuit Missionaries. From these interactions the Hurons were able to compare their own way of life and the Europeans’. The Indians particularly decried the European obsession with money that compelled European women to sell their bodies to lusty men and compelled men to sell their lives to the armies of greedy men who used them to enslave yet more people. By contrast, the Hurons lived a life of liberty and equality. According to the Hurons, the Europeans lost their freedom in their incessant use of “thine” and “mine”.

One of the Hurons explained to Lahontan, “We are born free and united brothers, each as much a great lord as the other, while you are all slaves of one sole man. I am the master of my body, I dispose of myself, I do what I wish, I am the first and last of my Nation…subject only to the great Spirit [Brandon, p.90]. It is difficult to tell where the Huron philosopher speaks and where Lahontan may be promoting his own political philosophy, but still the book rested on a base of solid ethnographic fact: the Hurons lived without social classes, without a government separate from their kinship system, and without private property. To describe this political situation, Lahontan revived the Greek-derived word “anarchy”, using it in the literal sense meaning “no ruler”. Lahontan found an orderly society, but one lacking a formal government that compelled such order.”

More on Indigenous people and our modern political system, later…..



The Illegal Immigration Issue

“The Illegal Immigration Issue” by Sha-King Cehum Allah

New Years’ Day, the first child was born to a immigrant couple of Guatemalan descent in Rhode Island. Afterwards the paternity papers were filed, later that day and the father was immediately seized and deported. While the couples’ roommate, a young Guatemalan man, was found hung to death in his room, when the police raided their home.

One of the most important issues during this presidential campaign is illegal immigration. Most people agree with tightening the security around the borders of the United States. The details of what that means is a very sensitive subject with it’s arms reaching into various sectors of society.

Even more controversial is the stance taken by those people closer to the issue at hand: so-called Latin Americans. While the illegal immigration policy involves anyone from a foreign country, those most affected are the United States’ neighbors, those in the Caribbean and Latin American countries to the South. This population of people is by no means homogenized when stating positions on the issue.

Ultimately, the position you adopt can put you at odds with your own people. So it is imperative that understanding be exercised. Many of us from Latin-American backgrounds probably have someone of some people in our families who have come here illegally at one time or another. And it shouldn’t be wrong to empathize with their determination for a better life. As well, it can not be argued, that not everyone who crosses the U.S.’s borders due so with the best of intentions. Neo-liberalism and capitalism paint pictures for people via television and media that simply aren’t upheld. I know someone who, as a little girl in Colombia, literally thought that the United States was like the lost city of El Dorado. A place of gold and fortune. A perspective she adopted from what she was exposed to via television in her home country. Upon arriving in the states ‘legally’ she found her and her family in the ‘projects’ and far from the American dream that sedated her with extravagant television images. As an adult, she now knows the truth. Many people arrive and experience a shock of tremendous proportions and are flung into homelessness and poverty, with some opting to etch out a living through criminal and nefarious activities. Which again, within a sociological mindset, one can understand. This then creates a generalized notion of “immigrants” and especially “illegal” immigrants which often result in negative stereotypes. These then put “legal” immigrants and the descendants of legal immigrants in the same category. It simply makes life harder for everyone. A contemporary example is the racial profiling of so-called Latinos in Washington D.C. where police randomly approached and harassed people, asking for their citizenship cards. The stigma of ‘illegal immigration’ makes a whole group of people seem unruly and uncivilized. In need of some sort of quarantining, some say, along the lines of a ‘fence’.

Illegal immigrants get blamed for taking away jobs, when it’s actual the corporations and companies who hire them who are responsible. It is the U.S.’s failed trade agreements which leave country’s economically shattered and result in people fleeing to where they have been told life is “better”. It is the support of the U.S. for un-democratic presidents and “dictators” which allow the continual downward spiral of many countries. And the people are caught up in this. Drug smuggling and terrorism aside. A vast majority of people who come to the United States do so for just reasons.

The ideology of “Reconquista” is common amongst many of our Mexica brothers and sisters, both across the border and here in the states. An ideology that I respect and understand. Nevertheless, it is an ideology that must be executed strategically and diplomatically and not one achieved by “squatting”. “Reconquista” is based on the history of continent of North America and the fact that the western part of the modern day United States is Aztlan, the homeland of the Mexica, mistakenly called “Aztecs”. Most “Mexicans” are these people or are the descendants of these people and are “Native American”, despite the U.S. perspective of who is and isn’t “Indian”. From their perspective, the border is a line in the sand and isn’t anything that is going to keep them from their homeland. To occupy and take back this land would be reversing, to a degree, the conquest of Native America executed by Europeans.

To many people in the world, and especially Native Americans, country boundaries are man-made and artificial. They were imposed by the Euro-centric colonizers as a means to divide up land and mark the control of territory by governmental laws and policies. Whose “governing” you or what laws you follow aren’t enough to separate or intentional distinguish one group of people from another. However, this notion of “land control” is held high by Euro-centrists. It is foreign to us. Yet and still, the conditions forced upon us are irreversible overnight and can only be resolved and dissolved through political means. We will need to be active participants in the government we live under, whether or not you acknowledge them as “true” power. Simply protesting will no do. The “system” and systems that be must be transformed, must be done from the inside out.

The lack of respect for the “laws of the land” is what really stirs up the issue. Not all immigrants lack respect for country laws, most do respect and abide by them. Obtaining a Visa and applying for citizenship thereafter and some even some degree of "patriotism". Some people may feel that they aren’t obligated to do so for whatever reason. Yet, they still expect to be treated with “citizen’s rights”. I will say that, if I entered into another country, let’s say-Canada, I’d be expected to follow guidelines. If I illegally entered into Canada, with reason, I could not expect to be given or treated with the same rights as it’s citizens. And would be deported. If other countries would have relaxed policies with illegal immigration, that is “Americans” simply sliding into their countries and living under the radar, then maybe it would be more reasonable to do the same. Since this is not the case, we must respect governmental policy until we change it. We can not depend of the conscience of the elites in power to do so in our best interest. The people must become involved and bring forth the change themselves.

With that being said, my perspective is that “change” is internal. You simply can not flee from the problems of the world. Similar to alcoholism or drug addiction, where one may hide from their own problems and mask them with substances, those who leave their own country to simply escape the turmoil there aren’t bringing forth any change. Once they leave that country, things continue as usual. We are addicted to this idea of freedom and democracy and have yet to fully understand it. One issue is that many people may not have been actively involved in the politics of their own country which means they are less likely to be involved here in the ‘states’. Some people may not be fit for politics or think that it’s not for them, because of lack of interest or lack of education. Revolutions have been led by some of the most uneducated people in history. Still their thirst for change was unquenchable and drove them to extraordinary heights.
Allah taught us that all things must “change or die”. This is the principle for all things in the universe. Build or be destroyed. Energetic transformation or atrophy. Despite what many people may think they know about our teachings, Allah encouraged us to respect the American flag and obey the laws of the land. Because one day, when we were qualified enough, we would be inheriting the government and would be in power. He told that that since we were born here and live here this is “our” country, and that we must protect the country and make it strong. With the greater influence and participation you have within the government, the more favorable the government is towards the people. The policies would be crafted for us and by us. If we think we have no obligation to follow the ‘rules’ because of our historical perspectives, we will remain in the past and not be able to move forward and continue to build and further civilization. The past is important to understand the present. Yet it is the present that defines the future. We must build NOW and not sit aside passively and expect others to make decisions for us. We must become the decision makers.

Allah’s views were unpopular in a time when separatism was a key term and black militancy and hatred for ’whites’ was a common theme. Most activists who favored integration were of Christian faith and those who favored separatism were Islamic or otherwise. Allah proclaimed himself “God” and walked his own path. Some of his views could be considered very conservative, but with good reason. He was clear about where we wanted the children in this country to go in the future. He understood that to make rules you yourself must know how to follow rules and that change in this country would not be achieved by protesting and blaming white America for our problems but by being educating, raising ourselves up and qualifying ourselves as the rightful owners of the land and the planet, as our ancestors once exhibited. This does not come from a nostalgic memorial walk through history, but understanding the “now” and the power within ourselves.

This message is very similar to what Bolivian President Evo Morales stated when he was interviewed on Comedy Central’s “Daily Show” with Jon Stewart a few months back. Stewart made a humorous statement about how the elections in the United States are “rigged”, inferring President Bush’s tinkering with the polls in his run against Al Gore. Morales simply smiled and replied by stating that this has to be changed, by the people who live here. He added on further saying that it is up to us to fix the problems in the government. While it may be true, that those who sought change in third countries were often met with bloodshed, it is unfortunately a consequence, a price, for freedom. Freedom is not free. The people must continue to wage the war of change against oppressive governments, through democratic processes or armed revolution (as a last resort). But the people must never give up or flee, for change will never come. People strive to get here and end up in the wilderness of North America and risk further hardships. Countless families have been broken up as a result of parents being deported. Numerous people have died crossing through the hot, arid deserts of the Southwestern U.S. Many people have been exploited by ‘smugglers’ seeking to make money by illegally bringing them here.

Regardless to your particular perspective on the issue, the health and welfare of families are at risk both here and abroad and we have to work strategically towards the change we desire to see and live. Understanding, that this change may not come in our lifetime, but willfully in our children’s or grandchildren’s. We have to balance culture, history, economy and government on the scales of justice and build for a better tomorrow without getting wound up in the political propaganda of those seeking candidacy and power.