Thanking Neil SteinbergBy The NOI Research Group | Last updated: Nov 19, 2012 - 1:03:20 PM
Steinberg, posing as an expert in Black history, advances the idiocy that “Farrakhan represents the end of a failed and marginal line of thinking, heir to a 100-year-old subcurrent in African-American history that was rejected by the vast majority of blacks, and for good reason.” Arrogant and pretentious though he may be, his is really a common attitude Jews hold toward their negroes. It is an undiminished relic of a time when their own top scholars admit they “frequently dominated” the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
According to The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 2, when Du Bois published these observations in a book called The Souls of Black Folks, he was called an “anti-Semite,” but a government study confirmed that Du Bois was spot on. The report revealed that in the middle of Black Georgia, “Nine-tenths of the storekeepers in Dougherty County are Jewish merchants—some Russian and German Jews, but most of them Polish Jews.”
Prominent Jews then pressured Du Bois to change the word “Jew” to “foreigner” or “immigrant.” They didn’t deny the truth of his observation, but demanded that he conceal this critical Jewish role from his Black readers. Even today one can find copies of the book with these sleight-of-hand variations of the original words. Our Black teachers should get the original “Jew” version to show our children (1) how Jews took over the role of slavemaster AFTER slavery and (2) exactly HOW they forced our most prominent scholar to hide that fact.
After its founding in 1909, Du Bois joined the NAACP and became the only Black member of its board of directors! At that time the board’s chairman was Oswald Garrison Villard, who offered his ECONOMIC PLAN for Blacks: “[If we] could place in every southern home a well-trained and respectful Colored servant the relations of the races would be changed overnight.”
You read that correctly. Today Neil Steinberg and the Chicago Sun Times would have the “vast majority” of Blacks follow this “mainstream” NAACP ideology right back into slavery! And at that time the Jewish owner of the New York Times, Adolf Ochs, wrote: “There is no reason why the South should be deprived of its Old Mammies.” A little training, he insisted, “will transform any intelligent colored woman into an Old Mammy. Northern capital could not be better employed….Why not have Old Mammy training schools at once?” To the Jews, we will always be “The Help.”
Despite this “helpful” “advice” Du Bois did his best to force the NAACP into a posture that represented the true aspirations of Blacks, but, like Minister Farrakhan, he met resistance from the Neil Steinbergs of his era. One White NAACP official complained, “Increasingly we are learning that the Negroes want to do things undirected. They, naturally, want all the glory.” When Du Bois began to exercise a little independent initiative with his stewardship over the organization’s Crisis magazine, he soon became the target of elimination by the Whites. They considered him “childish and insubordinate” and questioned his emotional stability. They called him a “danger”—“the only source of the disorder and lack of unity in the organization.” The Jewish Whites of today describe Minister Farrakhan the same way.
Garvey himself recounted his first encounter with the NAACP: “[I] was dumbfounded on approach to the office to find that but for Mr. Dill, Du Bois, [my]self and the office boy, [I] could not tell whether [I] was in a White office or that of the National Association for the Advancement of ‘Colored’ People. The whole staff was either White or very near White, and thus [I] got [my] first shock of the advancement hypocrisy. There was no representation of the race there that anyone could recognize.” In fact, that encounter convinced Garvey to start his own truly Black organization—the Universal Negro Improvement Association—to teach “colored” people “what real race pride meant.”
Steinberg continued his mangling of Black history. He wrote derisively that “Garvey was hobbled by the fact that most American Blacks did not want to go to Africa but instead wanted to gain their rights here, in this, their own land.” He again mis-uses Du Bois’s words in trying to show how sensibly he stood up to Garvey’s “moldy” Farrakhan-ish Back-to-Africa idea. Garvey wanted Blacks to engage in business and trade to strengthen their ties to one another throughout the African Diaspora. And though Garvey’s plan was almost identical to that which the Jews had employed for themselves, he encountered only hate and sabotage by the Jewish people. It was a Jew who sold him rotten, unseaworthy ships for his Black Star Line venture, and when the government persecuted him in court with obviously false, trumped-up charges, the prosecutor, the judge, and at least three of the jurors in that judicial lynching were all Jewish.
Garvey was jailed and ultimately deported, his movement undermined by the Steinbergs of his time—the Black economy was just too profitable to be left in the hands of Blacks. But the integrationist Du Bois was not far behind Garvey. The more he “integrated,” the more the U.S. government showed him just how much a “part of America” he was. When he opposed nuclear weapons, the government indicted him and confiscated his passport, and the Jewish-run NAACP refused to issue a statement of support. An embittered Du Bois finally began to question whether the philosophy he had championed could actually lead to Black freedom. He started to see the common features in the European’s oppression of the darker-skinned peoples of the world and soon he even began to echo a very Garveyite philosophy. He came to believe that Blacks “should begin to concentrate upon this problem of their economic survival.” He even suggested that a self-determined separation might not be so bad after all. In 1955, twenty-nine nations from Africa and Asia, representing most of the world’s “non-white” peoples, held the Bandung Conference in Indonesia. Du Bois tried to attend but the U.S. government prevented him from going.
Maybe the greatest irony of all is that Steinberg’s “moldy idea” of going “back to Africa” was never realized by Garvey; but it was realized by a disgusted and betrayed W.E.B. Du Bois, who left America for good in 1961 and became a citizen of Ghana. And as if to accentuate a life filled with INTEGRATIONIST disappointment, he died in Africa on August 27, 1963—the day before the most glorious occasion in integrationist lore, the March on Washington. It was as if he could not bear to see Blacks being forced into a direction he himself had so totally rejected.
Our Black history, in the scheming hands of Neil Steinberg and the Chicago Sun Times, becomes a savage weapon against our rise. Left to them, the extraordinary lives of Marcus Garvey and W.E.B. Du Bois would mean exactly the opposite of what those great leaders intended. BOTH of them presaged the great work of The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan! And BOTH of them CONFIRM the divine brilliance of his teacher The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad, who left us with these powerful words: “Our children should be trained in our own schools, not dropped into the schools of the enemy where they are taught that whites have been and forever will be world rulers….We will never get our own by mixing up with others and letting our children be brought up in their school. That has been the wrong thing to do. Teach your own children the knowledge of education yourself….We will never teach our people to love and respect self as long as we send them to a troublesome devil school.” Amin!