"Who are the slumlords in the black community? The so-called Jew . . . Who is it sucking our blood in the black community? A white imposter Arab and a white imposter Jew."--Khalid Abdul Mohammad, Nation of Islam spokesman.
These words are a mere sample of the litany of bigoted, anti-Semitic remarks of Khalid Mohammad, presented by the Anti-Defamation League in an advertisement on the last page of the Mar. 30 Chronicle.
The blatantly anti-Semitic content of the speech is reminiscent of the holocaust revisionism ad printed in The Chronicle on Nov. 5, 1991 and distributed by Bradley Smith, head of the fringe group, the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH). While the Duke community reacted with great anger to the flagrantly offensive statements in the advertisement, which suggested that the holocaust's devastation of the Jews was "highly exaggerated," the bigoted statements written by Smith and CODOH were perceived, and rightly so, as a drastically uncommon position given by a radical organization. Smith was dismissed as a leader of an extremist organization with implausible views.
Do not make a similar association with Khalid Mohammad. Do not perceive the Nation of Islam as a fringe organization. And certainly do not regard as a fanatic the head of the Nation--Louis Farrakhan.
Amidst a sea of African-American academics and elites, Louis Farrakhan stands apart as a leader of the black community. Although alienated from the major branch of the Muslim religion, Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam have formed a vigorous, grass-roots movement within the inner cities of America. Unlike any other modern leaders, Farrakhan and his disciples roll up their sleeves and dig down deep into the problems afflicting blacks nationwide.
In ghettos torn apart by drugs and crime, the Nation of Islam implements aggressive crime-fighting tactics and effective drug-counseling programs. As the inner cities decline into cycles of despair, the Nation provides a viable means for blacks to take back their neighborhoods.
The successful methods of the Nation have heightened the popularity of Farrakhan and the black community. A recent poll of a small proportion of the black community revealed that 67 percent of those surveyed found Farrakhan to be an effective leader, while over half agreed that he was a good role model for black youth. In Atlanta in 1992, a Farrakhan lecture attracted more people than a World Series game on the same night.
And these people are not merely those drawn to the controversy that Farrakhan elicits. They are followers of his message. Secrecy within the Nation of Islam inhibits a precise count, but its followers are predicted to number anywhere between 30,000 and 200,000.
Yet associated with these beneficial actions that the Nation supports is a message of hatred. There was little healing or rehabilitation offered in Khalid Mohammad's speech. But there was rage. Bigoted rage.
Although Farrakhan immediately tried to distance himself and the Nation from Mohammad after the aide spoke last November, his criticism of Mohammad did not refute the message. Hardly. In an interview with Time magazine after the speech, Farrakhan stated that Mohammad's presentation was flawed and full of "mockery," but that its content was undeniably true: "I could not say [Mohammad] is a liar, [that] he's wrong." Later in the interview, Farrakhan referred to Jews, Koreans and Arabs, as "bloodsuckers" of the black community.
In the interview with Time, Farrakhan spoke more calmly than his aide in the latter's speech to Kean College. But regardless of tone, inherent in Farrakhan's message is a blame of other communities. Inherent in his message is a component of hatred. Of Jews. Of whites. Of Koreans. Of Arabs. Of gays. It is bolstered when Farrakhan confirms the "truths" in Mohammad's bigoted assault. It is reiterated when Farrakhan complains just more than a month ago that the holocaust is receiving too much media coverage because of "Jewish manipulation in the media." Will hatred and bigotry always be inextricably linked to the preaching of Farrakhan?
On the one hand, then, Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam present a paradox to America. Little help has been provided to impoverished, inner-city blacks, as their lives are ripped apart by social ills. If the Nation of Islam provides a visible hand, it is only logical to grab that hand, regardless of whether it is blemished by scars of bigotry and hatred. The problem is put to America: Must a solution to the problems in the urban ghetto be linked to intolerance and rage?
On the other hand, what is presented to America is a vision of terror. The Nation of Islam is growing. The popularity of Farrakhan is growing. And as more people embrace the doctrine which preachers such as Mohammad espouse, the threat to the social fabric of America is growing.
Bradley Smith and his extremist views made little resonance anywhere; Khalid Mohammad and his inflammatory words are sounding loudly on the streets and campuses of America.
Lewis Krauskopf is a Trinity junior and assistant sports editor of The Chronicle.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.