The figure of the "militant mulato" is scattered all throughout history from Malcolm X to Angela Davis to so many others. Many authors and historians have pointed out that many light skinned blacks have historically had an apparent tendency for militancy. I also can find examples of this in my personal life as well.
Without getting into whether a radical viewpoint is right, wrong or whatever:
Why do y'all think that this phenomenon exists?
Is it over-compensation for not feeling black enough as others have pointed out?
Is it that light skinned blacks were afforded the "breathing room" by the establsihment to be more radical?
Does it stem from some sort of identity-crisis/anger about being inter-racial?
>I am not trying to engage >in self divide and conquer, >mererly asking a question.
never said you were player....
>If you disagee cool. I am >just trying to understand my >people, their concerns, motivations etc. >better that's all.
not to clown, but to what end? are you asking if folks think tht "light skinned" Blacks over-compensate for their "lightness" by being militant?
maybe i don't get it
>I am certainly not trying to >segement, its too late for >that, I am only trying >to understand one side-effect >of that historic segmentation.
again, not to be arguementative, but perpetuation (through analysis) of a faulty phenomenon seems a bit counteractive in terms of generating positive change.
to in some way imply that davis or malcom x did the things they did because they were "lighter" (forgive me if this was not the implication, it's just what i got from the post) seems a bit like one of "the man's" schemes to somehow denigrate contributions.
at some point we gotta (opinionally speaking of course) get PAST this kinda stuff and get to the issues at hand -- namely OPRESSSION.
why bother questioning motives if the result gets us closer to our agreed goal?
>Nonetheless thanks for your input.
no doubt. this is all just dialog, and i was just sharing amy limited viewpoint
4. "a more direct answer" In response to Reply # 0
>The figure of the "militant mulato" >is scattered all throughout history >from Malcolm X to Angela >Davis to so many others.
faulty. are angela davis and malcom x mulattos based on hertitage or simply because they have "light skin"? which of the two groups are we talking about, because thy ARE two differnt groups (mulattos and light skinned, i mean).
>Many authors and historians have >pointed out that many light >skinned blacks have historically had >an apparent tendency for militancy.
just because they wrote it doesn't make it necessarily true. many authors and scholars have ALSO pointed out how Black people are genetically infereor to whites. see my point.
but not to discount you point here totally, could you elaborate on the statement "historically had an apparent tendency for militancy". what is this based on (in those scholars and author's minds/words)? this is an interesting concept? what is said abot "light skinned" black who AREN'T particularly militant (or darker skinned ones who ARE)? are these abberations?
>Why do y'all think that this >phenomenon exists?
opinion follows: many phenomenons exist and are perpetuated simply based on the fact that folk pass them along (independant of treu relevance, fact, or basis).
>Is it over-compensation for not feeling >black enough as others have >pointed out?
let's examine the two examples you selected earlier? has anyone ever heard either malcolm x or angela davis say they do/did they things they to to comensate for skin color? the funny thing about racists, is that "just enough" black or whatever) is enough. so, my question would be on what basis are "others" pointing this out?
>Is it that light skinned blacks >were afforded the "breathing room" >by the establsihment to be >more radical?
elaborate on this concept? if anything wouldn't "the establishment" get at lighter skinned blacks because of their potential to "pass"? why would they extend "breathing room?"
>Does it stem from some sort >of identity-crisis/anger about being inter-racial?
again, light skin != inter-racial.
please clarify to avoid mixing apples and oranges
(again...this is just analysis of a concept -- not a persoanl attack to the original poster)
6. "RE: a more direct answer" In response to Reply # 4
First I will address your posts, then try and clarify again cause I think we are not communicating.
In general though I think our agressive tone (despite you then writing "not to sound argumentative") might be counter productive.
>faulty. are angela davis and malcom >x mulattos based on hertitage >or simply because they have >"light skin"? which of the >two groups are we talking >about, because thy ARE two >differnt groups.
They certainly are two different groups, mulatto at least in the US - speaking about people of direct mixed-race (ie. their parents) and light skin people- black people who have some non-west african ethnicity in them. Regardless it is not a central point since what I was asking about can/and has been applied to both groups. Specifically, both of these people have Europoean heritage as well as African.
>just because they wrote it doesn't >make it necessarily true. many >authors and scholars have ALSO >pointed out how Black people >are genetically infereor to whites. >see my point.
Yeah. Obviously. I was not saying that this was true becasue people wrote it. I wanted people opinions on this.
>but not to discount you point >here totally, could you elaborate >on the statement "historically had >an apparent tendency for militancy". >what is this based on >(in those scholars and author's >minds/words)? this is an interesting >concept? what is said abot >"light skinned" black who AREN'T >particularly militant (or darker skinned >ones who ARE)? are these >abberations?
Not at all. I did not say anying like they are more militant than darker people. Its just that many historical mulattos AND lightshkined people have been further to the extremes of the political spectrum. Some people have found this interesting given that they have some ethnic connection to those who they are fighting? I was merely asking the board what they thought about it.
The questions that followed were just examples of other people's ideas as to why this exists, not mine. But thank you for your opinions on them. I certainly agree that light-skin and interacial can not be used interchangeabley, though in the West the vast majoity of people of West African descent who are light skin are that way becasue of a another race in their ancestry.
All this thoough is way off the question, but regardless I am glad that it has brought up wider issues of: self-segregation, black people as multi-ethnic etc.
5. "RE: Militant Mullatoes" In response to Reply # 0
There is no such thing. Black militants come in all shades. I don't see a phenomenon of light-skinned militants. For every light militant there is a dark. I have one brother who is black as midnight and another brother who is high yellow same mother and father WTF. Both militant, educated black men. This has been the same throughout history. From Marcus Garvey to Dubois.
7. "RE: Militant Mullatoes" In response to Reply # 0
> >Peace, > >The figure of the "militant mulato" >is scattered all throughout history >from Malcolm X to Angela >Davis to so many others. >Many authors and historians have >pointed out that many light >skinned blacks have historically had >an apparent tendency for militancy. >I also can find examples >of this in my personal >life as well. >
I don't think Angela or Malcolm would be considered mulattos.
>Without getting into whether a radical >viewpoint is right, wrong or >whatever: > >Why do y'all think that this >phenomenon exists?
No I think it's your imagination. > >Is it over-compensation for not feeling >black enough as others have >pointed out? >
Not being black enough is something I deal with everyday, why in the world would I risk my life fighting for folks that deem me not black enough.
>Is it that light skinned blacks >were afforded the "breathing room" >by the establsihment to be >more radical?
8. "RE: Militant Mullatoes" In response to Reply # 0
i think lighter colored blacks are more millitant because of how the world looks at them as being better... how they are reguarded are smarter,prettier,and all that mess... and they want to tear down that kind of treatment... you know... they want to feel equal to all shades of blacks... you know...the same treatment for all shades...
_____________________________________
"Hard knock life :This one is for everybody,This one right here,You can call it THE GHETTO ANTHEM,Because This one is for the people,Everybody who ever has been though any type of shit in thir life can any hard shit that's what hard knock life life is about,If you notice the chorus,They're not singing like thir sad,Their singing like "Yo it's a hard knock life"Just letting people know.It's a beautiful thing deal with it."-Shawn Carter _______________________________________
peace, i am not familiar with angela davis' story but malcolm x was a convict, who opened his hands and was given Islam, and thus became affiliated the NOI, if i'm not mistaken. they were/are known to be militant throughout the organization. so wouldnt his militant behaviors be a result or product of his peers/environment (the NOI) rather than the colour of his skin? just a speculation. wa alaikum as salaam
"great spirits often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds" - albert einstein
"whomever conceptualized the mechanism(and derivatives of) calculus should be beaten and stabbed, and then vice versa" - me
Ive never even looked at it that way, the shade of thier skin. Hmm..does it really matter?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get ta yippidy & yappin about the mouf: aim=QweenFiyah yahoo=kisszion _________________________________ *Open Your 3rd Eye* http://www.geocities.com/kisszion/cleansing.html ________________________________________
But I certainly does matter in terms of people experiences, how they are veiwed by the establishment, how they see themselved as part of the struggle, repatriation etc.
12. "RE: yep it does..." In response to Reply # 11
> >Black is black (whatever that is).
lol black=black theres nothing complicated about it.
>But I certainly does matter in >terms of people experiences, how >they are veiwed by the >establishment, how they see themselved >as part of the struggle, >repatriation etc.
I get what you are saying but when it comes down to it a black revolutionary is just that. Meaning the sitauation may be different as far as personal esperiences but the circumstances are the same.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get ta yippidy & yappin about the mouf: aim=QweenFiyah yahoo=kisszion _________________________________ *Open Your 3rd Eye* http://www.geocities.com/kisszion/cleansing.html ________________________________________
13. "RE: yep it does..." In response to Reply # 12
Peace y'all,
i feel like sometimes it IS that they feel that they have something to prove SOMETIMES but not by any means MOST of the time. I feel like even if mullatos DO feel like they have something to prove then GOOD, maybe they will pick up some impoertant things along the way. Also, as a child of BOTH a black person AND a white person, those children who get to see BOTH worlds may actually know MORE of a reason WHY they should protest injustice due to thier INSIDE scoop of what the deal is, my best friend was mullato and she lived with her mom, she was introduced to things that I had never been introduced to from her moms side but her dad used to be in the Black Panther Party...actually they both were, but thats a different story....
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
Okay Activist Archives
