The rise and fall of Harlem: the conspiracy to retake Harlem. Fact or Fiction? The finale part six.

In conclusion, in part one of this mini blog I asked the question, who is at fault for the re-taken of Harlem? The greedy white corporations with Uncle Tom like Negroes at the forefront. Or us the black residents who live in Harlem and consider Harlem our Mecca. I say both!

We are at fault because we refused to unite and pool our resources together in a collective manner for an infinite purpose. Especially those who know. So that being the case and the case being that everything in existence has an accountability attached to it, then we all are held accountable.

Of course there is a history behind why we don't pool our resources, or why we won't unite for a common cause. But that is another subject for another time. Bottom line is we could have stopped the gentrification or the so called empowerment zone, if we just as simply boycotted. Don't spend our money with stores or businesses that are non-black.

Look at china town. The majority of the businesses down there are owned and operated by the Chinese. Hence the name china town. Why can't we have a black town? Why does everyone else get to have their own town except black people?

Last but not least, I wouldn't say it is white America's greedy corporation fault. Because they are here to do what they were born to do. Rape, pillage and plunder. They have been doing this so long I can't even fault them, it is what it is, and oft times it is easier to just accept the realities or nature of a thing. Why? Because we should never waste our time searching for that which does not exist. Freedom, justice and equality do not exist among certain people. That being the case the weight is on our shoulders to make sure we have a financial stake where we live.

Now there is another element in the fall of Harlem. And that element is the Abyssinia development corporation. Under them Pathmark was able to open up in Harlem, Walt Disney (now closed) and many others. Consider some of the co-chairmen on the Abyssinia development corporation

• John boyle – ceo & chairman of Pathmark
  
• Mary cosgrove – Sr vp of citi bank
  
• Gerald Levine – ceo of time Warner
  
• Kenneth chenault – ceo of American express ( Mr. chenault is black and also a member of the council of foreign relations )
  
• Carol perry – chase bank
  
• Horace webb – con Edison
  

Calvin butts is the chairman of the Abyssinia development corporation, and more than likely a member of the boule. (More about the boule in the next blog)

In summary. Harlem was sold out by some of our own people who were promised a stake in Harlem. and the white investors went through the black church. Even some churches were sold and made into condos (so even god isn't safe in his own house) so now today we are stuck in the middle of a war to completely over take harlem, which hasn't happened as of yet. Only the future will tell where this all leads.

The rise and fall of Harlem: the conspiracy to retake Harlem. Fact or Fiction? Part five

This will be a sought of pre-recap/summary before I conclude this series in the next and final part. (Part 6) so the bottom line is this, like it or not, black people were not brought over to America in slave ships to be producers for themselves (or ourselves). No, instead we were brought over here to the HELLS of North America to be producers for white America. We were not brought over here to help the Native Americans. We brought over here to be fools and tools for white America. Surely you didn't think that the enemy brought us 9,000 miles from Africa to America so he could help us open up a steak and take, or a boutique or to help us get a SBA loan so we may do for self. And this is not hate or rhetoric; this is the un-disputable, in-refutable un-deniable fact, proof and history of our sojourn in America.

• From the author Samuel Goode in his book entitled "Turning to the south" he states the following: "and all the gold mines of the world have not produced enough gold in 500 years to pay for thirty crops of the south's cotton, and all the silver mines of the world for same 500 years produced $500,000,000 less than the value of the south's thirty years cotton crop."
  
• From the Atlanta Constitution it calculated that the thirty years after emancipation " the nations cotton crop generated nearly $8.5 billion (now worth $224 Billion) nearly triple the amount of money generated from the production of gold and silver in the united states in the previous century"
  

So from the above two examples is why we were brought over here to make others rich. Simple and plain.

It is stated that history repeats its self, for those who don't learn. It is also said or stated that the present is built off of yesterday and tomorrow is built on today. And last but not least it is also stated that there is nothing new under the sun, what was done yesterday will be done today. But before I continue let me call some witnesses to the witness stand, and let's see if we can "do the math "as we say. Basically meaning, let's see if can add everything together and see what the sum or total is today.

• From author Kenneth Stampp in his book entitled " The Era of Reconstruction, 1865-1877 " he states the following: " the purpose of Jim Crow was to keep the negro ( that's you black people in case you didn't know), as long as possible, exactly what he was, a property-less rural laborer under strict controls, without political rights, and with inferior legal rights." (also see William Cohen "At Freedoms Edge: Black Mobility and the Southern White Quest for Racial Control" , 1861-1915 and also David Brown and Clive Webb "Race in the American South: from Slavery to Civil Rights)
  
• From the author Williamson "After Slavery" and author Durrill " The south Carolina black code " they state the following: (or reported the following) " one planter reminded the framers (of the new black codes) that freed black people should be prohibited from ever owning real estate and the very idea of land ownership should never cross the their minds
  
• From the author Juliet Walker in her book entitled "The History Black Business in America: Capitalism, Race, Entrepreneurship", states the following: "the negroes…. Keep a large amount of money in circulation in the country, and consume on a much larger scale than formerly, which makes the business of supplying them as lucrative, if not more so, then planting or renting"
  

So looking at the above is it coincidence that black farm owners/operators in south only own 1.49 million acres of land, down from 15 million acres of land in the 1920's. (see African American Rural Land Wealth: The Crisis and the Opportunities", Prof. Thomas Mitchell, Univ. of Wisconsin Law School) in the book it also states that some of the problems black farm owners face is (1) denial of credit and (2) high predatory loans.

And what about the inferior legal rights? This is from the department of Justice:

 

"Among Federal offenders sentenced under guide lines from January 20, 1989, to June 30, 1990, there were substantial aggregate differences in sentences imposed on white, black, and Hispanic offenders. During this period, 85% of Hispanic offenders and 78%of black offenders were sentenced to imprisonment, compared with 72%of white offenders. On average, black offenders sentenced to prison during this period had imposed sentences that were 41% longer than for whites (21months longer). For incarcerated Hispanics, the average imposed sentence did not differ significantly from the average sentence for whites." (see U.S. department of Justice: office of justice programs Bureau of justice statistics: sentencing in federal courts: does race matters.)

 

And last but not least, black spending power in America is According to a survey: black buying power is estimated now at about $913 billion and is projected to increase to $1.2 trillion by 2013.
A similar study released in November by the Selig Center at the University of Georgia estimated that black buying power would be about $1.1 trillion by 2014, with current spending power for blacks at about $910 billion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE RISE AND FALL OF HARLEM: THE CONSPIRACY TO RETAKE HARLEM. FACT OR FICTION? PT 4

Let's jump for a second from the 1700's to the late 1800's and the early 1900's when blacks began to migrate from the south to the north, (Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Baltimore, also to the west and the Midwest) but in particular Harlem.

Now prior to the mass migration of blacks from the south (between the years of 1910-1930) see
Hahn, Steven. A Nation Under Our Feet (2003) there was already the presence of a group of individuals that call themselves Jews. (See Jeffery Gurock : when Harlem was Jewish. 1870-1930 ) As this article or blog continues we will see the importance of the European Jews and its relationship (or secret relationship) with blacks in America. And whether or not they are or were the primary(note: this writer used the word "primary" because this writer is not going to advocate that the Jews or anyone else is the sole 100% reason why black people do not control Harlem) cause of the decline of Harlem. And did they conspire to keep Harlem out of the hands of black people.

The Jewish presence in New York City goes back to the 17^th century. (According to Joyce gold she stated the following "Harlem was once the third largest Jewish settlement in the world, after Warsaw and the Lower East Side."
She
teaches New York history at New York University and the New School for Social Research) The European Jew specialized as auctioneers, bounty hunters, plantation owners, they insured the slave vessels and other forms of business, but in particular they mastered peddling, which became one of his most lucrative occupations. (Jews grew from peddling on the streets to forming major department stores like Macys, Gimbles, Blumstein's, sears and etc) By 1915 one out of every four New Yorker was a Jew and Jews represented between 8 and 10 percent of the population of other urban centers like Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston and Baltimore.

But aside from the stated above they also had a prime stake in real estate. German Jews had long been established in the financial center of New York. By the time of the post civil war they had amassed such wealth that they could offer backing to the governments of both the union and the confederacy. (See avraham barkai: branching out and finance the North American continent) By the 1900's New York City listed 60 Jewish millionaires. And the root of German Jewish financial backing was clear, of 52 banking institutions in Berlin at the beginning of the 19^th century, 30 were Jewish. (Another subject another time)

The purpose of the previous two paragraphs is to (1) establish the presence of the Jews in New York City, in particular Harlem and (2) to establish their financial power in New York and in Harlem. Now let's look at another side of the Jewish / black relationship and how it relates to the social and economic condition of Harlem.

 

Fyodor Dostoyevsky (a Russian novelist 1821-1881, wrote "the diary of a writer") stated the following "they have already leaped en masse upon the millions of liberated negroes and have already taken a grip upon them in their, the Jews, own way by means of their everlasting gold pursuit and by taking advantage of the inexperienced and vices of the exploited tribe…… the negroes are a treasure for the Jews"

According to Stuart Rockoff of the institute of southern Jewish life he stated the following "the rural south started its decline around the time when African Americans, the majority of whom had worked as agricultural laborers, began migrating to seek industrial jobs in northern cities like Chicago (and New York) because of their migration (black people) economic opportunity for Jewish merchants, who had relied on African American as customers, diminished too, and so the Jews started migrating to big cities as well" In 1898 Blumstein's department store opened up on 125st (75% of Blumstein's sales were to African Americans but the company refused to employ them as clerks or cashiers)

So according to the above two paragraphs, the Jews depended on the patronage of the black man and women. (Although he didn't see fit to hire them as employees) There economic survival depended on the black consumer, and you know there is a thin line between a consumer and a producer. If black people become producers and supported only one another? Then where would that leave the Jew?

Now as the black presence began to increase, whites declined to rent to blacks or sell them their properties. If they did rent to a black family they charged the black family nearly triple versus what white people were paying. For example: a one room apartment rented to whites for $40 a month, but the same one room apartment rented for $100-125 a month.

In or around 1901 there was a black real estate entrepreneur by the name of Phillip Payton JR who's company name was afro-American realty company. His company, the Afro-American Realty Company, was almost single-handedly responsible for migration of blacks from their previous neighborhoods,
the Tenderloin, San Juan Hill (now the site of Lincoln Center), Minetta Lane in Greenwich Village and Hell's Kitchen in the west 40s and 50s^] The move to northern Manhattan was driven in part by fears that anti-black riots such as those that had occurred in the Tenderloin in 1900^] and in San Juan Hill in 1905 might recur.

Between 1907 and 1915, some white residents of Harlem resisted the neighborhood's change, especially once the swelling black population pressed west of Lenox Avenue which served as an informal color line until the early 1920s Some made pacts not to sell to or rent to blacks.(that sounds like a conspiracy to me) Others tried to buy property and evict black tenants, but the Afro-American Realty Company retaliated by buying other property and evicting whites. They also attempted to convince banks to deny mortgages to black buyers, but soon gave up.

The rise and fall of Harlem: the conspiracy to retake Harlem. Fact or Fiction? Part three

The social, political and economic issues surrounding gentrification may seem like a new conflict, but in fact gentrification (means when the rich take property from the poor) goes back to 1626, when the Dutch conquered (or purchased for 60 Dutch guilders, the equivalent of $24 or in some estimates $1000 dollars U.S. money, but if the natives would have declined to sell it I wonder if Mr. Minuit would have just walked away.) the area called Manhattan (today) from the Native American tribe called The MANHATTANS or/and another tribe called the LENAPE. The name Harlem derives from the Haarlem, located in the Netherlands. The first Europeans to conquer this area called Harlem or/and Manhattan were the Dutch. It was peter Minuit who purchased the area that is now called Manhattan (today) on behalf of the Dutch west India Company. (More about them and the Dutch east India Company later)

(The origin of the word "gentrification" comes from the word "gentrify" which means "to renovate inner city housing to middle class standards" gentrify is a compound word broken down in the following manner: "gentry" + "fy", "gentry" means nobility of rank or/and birth, also in character. "fy" is a suffix meaning to "make into" or/and "to make, do' / nobility or to be noble is to be "illustrious, distinguished, worthy of honor or respect and of superior birth./ Now here is the root of the problem in the issue of "gentrification"(or in plain English the taken of land and property, the denial of freedom, justice and equality) It is the mindset that another people believe that they are inherently superior to another, so that gives them the birth right to just usurp another people from their land, village or residency without regard to their future, culture and well being. )

According to the history, Harlem was only a village, or a settlement, founded by Hendricks (Henry) de Forest, Isaac de Forest, his brother, and their sister Rachel de Forest, French Dutch immigrants in 1637. (See the book: Ellis, Edward Robb (1966). The Epic of New York
City) The settlement was officially formalized in 1658, known as Nieuw Haarlem. By the last appointed director on behalf of the Dutch west India Company, peter Stuyvesant. (Of course Bedford–Stuyvesant in Brooklyn
is named after peter Stuyvesant also)

The Indian trail to Harlem's lush bottomland meadows was rebuilt by black laborers of the Dutch West India Company and eventually developed into the Boston Post Road. (More than likely in the Bronx) In 1664, the English took control of the New Netherland colony and anglicized the name of the town to Harlem. On September 16, 1776, the Battle of Harlem Heights,(this battle was between the Americans and the British) sometimes referred to as the Battle of Harlem or Battle of Harlem Plain, was fought in western Harlem around the Hollow Way (now West 125th St.), with conflicts on Morningside Heights to the south and Harlem Heights to the north.

Differences in conceptions of property rights between the Europeans and the Lenape resulted in widespread confusion among the Lenape and the eventual loss of their lands. (Gentrification) After the Dutch arrival in the 1620s, the Lenape were successful in restricting Dutch settlement until the 1660s to Pavonia in present-day Jersey City along the Hudson. The Dutch finally established a garrison at Bergen, which allowed settlement west of the Hudson within the province of New Netherland.

"In the early 1680s, William Penn and Quaker colonists created the English colony of Pennsylvania on the Delaware River. In the decades immediately following, some 20,000 new colonists arrived in the region, putting pressure on Lenape settlements and hunting grounds. Although Penn endeavored to live peaceably with the Lenape and to create a colony that would do the same, he also expected his authority and that of the colonial government to take precedence. His new colony effectively displaced the Lenape and forced others to adapt to new cultural demands. Penn gained a reputation for uncommon benevolence and tolerance, but his efforts resulted in more effective colonization of the ancestral Lenape homeland than previous ones." (See Historian James O'Neil Spady)

In 1758 there was the treaty of Easton, between the Lenape and the Anglo-American colonists, required the Lenape to move westward, out of present-day New York and New Jersey and into Pennsylvania, then Ohio and beyond. Sporadically they continued to raid European-American settlers from far outside the area. In 1778 there was another treaty called "the called treaty of fort Pitt" (I guess we know what happened to that treaty)

The following is an excerpt from the book west Virginia: A history for beginners.

Native American Concept of Land
a major factor in the treaty disputes was Native Americans' concept of land. Indians fought among themselves over hunting rights to the territory but the Native American idea of "right" to the land was very different from the legalistic and individual nature of European ownership. John Alexander Williams describes this in his book, West Virginia: A History for Beginners:

The Indians had no concept of "private property," as applied to the land. Only among the Delaware's was it customary for families, during certain times of the year, to be assigned specific hunting territories. Apparently this was an unusual practice, not found among other Indians. Certainly, the idea of an individual having exclusive use of a particular piece of land was completely strange to Native Americans.

The Indians practiced communal land ownership. That is, the entire community owned the land upon which it lived…..

 

 

 

The rise and fall of Harlem: the conspiracy to retake Harlem. Fact or Fiction? Part two

Although the title of this little miniseries (or mini blog) is centered on a specific geographical location, called Harlem, it is only a sign of what is or will come soon (if not already) to other urban areas throughout America. So if they are not taken over your city now through gentrification they might be after you read this blog.

A key word in the title of this blog is "conspiracy "What is a conspiracy? [Note: there are several other different classes or kinds of conspiracy. Civil conspiracy, criminal conspiracy and political conspiracy] "an evil or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons "according to etymology (the origins, history and meaning of words) the history and meaning of the word "surreptitious" is as follows: it is from the mid 15 century from Latin "sur-rep-ti-cius" meaning stolen (or to steal) furtive (means theft, robbery) or clandestine. From "sur-rep-tus" – "sur-ri-pere" to seize secretly. From sub- (meaning from under)+rapere "to snatch"

So has there ever been any known conspiracies to steal, snatch or/and seize a people, place or thing? Or/and to exclude certain people from certain activities? Well funny as it may seem 400+ years ago black people were stolen, snatched and seized and dispersed throughout the western hemisphere by a certain people. The so called Native Americans had their land snatched, stolen and seized by a certain people. In South Africa the Africans had their land snatched, stolen and seized from them by a certain group of people. And today it appears that Harlem is about to be snatched, stolen and seized from black people by a certain group of people. This particular certain group of people seems to have one thing in common they all classify themselves as either white, European or Caucasian. (By no means is this a sweeping indictment of all white, European or Caucasian people)

The purpose of this writer illustrating the said above is kill any rhetoric that this writer is a conspiracy theorist or/and paranoid. This writer is a real-ist that deals with the harsh realities of what is. It has always been stated that history best qualifies to reward our re-search. Why? Because today is built off of yesterday and tomorrow is built off today. Meaning, if we know what happened yesterday, then we can intelligently analyze, discuss and assess it today and not let the same thing go down today that went down yesterday. So therefore, if white, European or Caucasians have a history of snatching, stealing or/and seizing other peoples land (and other things) in an evil manner, then I have a right to be suspicious about what is going on in Harlem today.

So what is the process that is being used today to remove black people from their Mecca? It is called "Gentrification". What is Gentrification? It refers to the changes that result when wealthier people acquire property in low income and working class communities.

Urban gentrification causes the average income to increase (for some). It is commonly believed (or known) that this results in the poorer native residents of the neighborhood, being unable to pay increased rents, house prices, and property taxes, being displaced. Taxes paid to the city go up. Often old industrial buildings are converted to residences and shops. In addition, new businesses, catering to a more affluent base of consumers, move in, further increasing the appeal to more affluent migrants and decreasing the accessibility to the poor.
Urban gentrification occasionally changes the culturally heterogeneous character of a community to a more economically homogeneous community that some describe as having a suburban character. This process is sometimes made feasible by government-sponsored private real estate investment. (The latter part is highlighted in bold to bring attention to a question that was raised in part one. Which was, who is at fault for Harlem not being owned and controlled by the blacks that reside in Harlem) that question will be partly answered in part four (4) when we look at redlining. Part three (3) will explore the origins of Harlem going back to 1637.

 

The rise and fall of Harlem: the conspiracy to retake Harlem. Fact or Fiction? Part one

When one hears of Harlem New York, automatically Black People and culture comes to mind, in addition to Places like the cotton club, Lenox lounge, jazz lounges and Sylvia's. People like madam CJ walker, Langston Hughes, Adam Clayton Powell and other notable personatilities. But last but not least the term Black Mecca comes to mind and un-consciously black ownership. What is Mecca? Mecca is one of the holiest cities located in Saudi Arabia to the Muslims. Well Harlem was (and still is) to black people what Mecca is to Muslims (or Arabs) our holy city. However what's the difference between the Mecca in Saudi Arabia, in the east and the Mecca in Harlem, in the west.

The difference is Mecca (in the east) is flourished with businesses owned and operated by the Arab the people. However the Mecca (in the west) is flourished with businesses owned and operated by other (Arabs, Jews and Africans) people other than black people. With the exception of a few black owned businesses. (FYI when the term black people is used in this blog it is referring to the so called African American) [FYI stands for "For Your Information " ]

The land or real estate in Mecca in the east is owned by the Arabs, the land or real estate in Mecca in the west is owned by others (mainly the Jews). But why is this situation present? Who is to blame? Is it other nationalities fault that Harlem isn't owned and operated by black people? Or is it black people's fault that we don't own or operate anything in Harlem? Or are we both to blame? Or was it a conspiracy to deprive black people in Harlem (and elsewhere) the right to own and operate their own businesses? And ultimately control their own destiny. How did black ownership get swept from black people in Harlem? Why is it that black people do not control their own education in their own area? (All the above shall be answered in the blogs to come)

I was always taught that everything in existence is based on the law of Cause and Effect (or action and re-action). so therefore Before we can even engage in the conversation about who's to blame we need to know the what (the history is of what is called Harlem today) where (did the name come from) when (was it named Harlem) who (who named it Harlem) and how (did we get to our present situation), we need to over-stand the beginning or the root of what is called Harlem today and work our way up to today. They say in order to understand the present and have a picture of the possible future you must know and over-stand the past. [ this writer uses the term " over-stand or over-standing instead of under-stand or under-standing , because to under is to exist below a thing and over is to exist on top of a thing, so today we want to be on top of what has and is going on ]

• Harlem stretches from the east river to the Hudson River, from 155^th street to 110^th street.
  
• In the late 1960s, 60% of the businesses in Harlem were reportedly owned and operated by blacks and increasing. (From the book: the economic development of Harlem: by Thomas Vietorisz and Bennett Harrison.)
  
• In 1910 the population of Harlem was estimated at 181,949. 9.89% black and 90.01% white.
  
• In 1920 the population of Harlem was estimated at 216,026. 32.43% black and 67.47 white.
  
• In 1930 the population of Harlem was estimated at 209,663. 70.18% black and 29.43 white.
  
• In 1960 the population of Harlem was estimated at 163,632. 96.71% black and 2.94 white.
  
• In 2006 the population of Harlem was estimated at 118,111. 69.27% black and 6.55 white. ( in 1980 the lowest % of whites living in Harlem had dropped to .62%, while blacks made up 94.17% of the population)
  

Stay tuned for in the next blog we will go into the very origins of this section or part called Harlem from the Native Americans to the Dutch settlers and onward.