As another Black History Month draws to a close, I think it's appropriate to close it out with a story about another black individual whose activities have been portrayed as one more crucial step in the progression towards full civil rights for black Americans. The story of Rosa Parks is a story of just one of those individuals.
Rosa Parks (pictured at left courtesy of Achievement.org), of course, became famous for refusing to give up her seat on a bus in Montgomery, AL, in 1955. On December 1st of that year she boarded a city bus and sat in a row at the front of the "colored" section. The whites-only section in the front of the bus filled up and a white man was left standing. The bus driver demanded that Mrs. Parks and three other patrons in the colored section give up their seats so the white man could sit. The other three people moved but Mrs. Parks, apparently tired from another day's work as a seamstress and "deciding" that she had been "pushed around" enough, refused to yield her seat. She was arrested when the bus driver contacted the police and filed charges against her. Four days later she was found guilty of disorderly conduct. This confrontration perpetuated the chain of events leading to Martin Luther King's "ministry" and culminating in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, although the black "civil rights lobby", unsatisfied with mere equality, have continued to escalate their demands thereafter.
Or so we're told.
But, thanks to an alternative monthly tabloid newspaper called The First Freedom (not to be confused with the NRA's "America's 1st Freedom"), we find that there is much more to Rosa Parks than what meets the eye. A column entitled "The True Parks Story", published by an individual writing under the nom de plume of "MLK Boulevard", provides much more information about this civil rights "heroine". I reproduce the column below in its entirety:
The True Parks Story
by "MLK Boulevard"
Pity the brainwashed victims of liberal guilt who can’t accept any valid reason for White pride except “hate.” Only lies deserve hate; one does not love or hate on command.
USA Today reports that NEA teachers have seen to it that every public school child in America knows their version of "The Rosa Parks Story." It goes something like this: a poor, tired, Black seamstress took a seat in the front of a Montgomery, Alabama bus on December 1, 1955. The driver asked her to move to the back under the state’s segregation law. For refusing, Parks was arrested. Four days later Martin Luther King arrived in town and launched the Montgomery Bus Boycott. After 381 days, the Supreme Court ordered the city buses integrated. [Ed. Note: Parks was already in the "black" section, but was asked to get up to allow a white to be seated. This is another reason we must re-visit official history from time to time, to ensure it becomes and remains factual. Errors can be made on BOTH sides.]
THE TRUE PARKS STORY
The behind-the-scenes intelligence is that Rosa Parks was secretary of the local NAACP. The book, "Speak Now", a left-wing history of the civil rights movement, states that in August of 1955, four months before the bus incident, Parks attended the Highlander Folk School in Mount Eagle, Tennessee. The "school" was started in 1932 by Myles Horton and James Dombrowski, both of them members of the Communist Party.
The book "Speak Now" states that the school’s original purpose was to train Communist activists on how to promote textile strikes, hold protest marches, picket lines and learn "socialist songs." The Textile Workers Union was completely controlled by the Communist Party. On page 529, "Speak Now" reads: "FBI surveillance of the Highlander Folk School and the Southern Conference Educational Fund (SCEF) intensified. In 1952 Myles Horton would invest their energy and resources in the historic Southern struggle over desegregation of the public schools."
Speak Now says that Parks attended summer training at the Highlander Folk school in 1955, 1956 and 1957. She is pictured with Martin Luther King sitting on the front row in a Highlander training class on September 2, 1957. Thus, the liberals’ story that she was just "a poor, tired black seamstress" when sitting in the front of the bus is a total lie! [Ed. Note: Yes, she was sitting on the bus, and yes, by profession, she was a seamstress, but she was also a trained agitator and activist, and this column apparently suggests the possibility she may have been put up to this civil disobedience in advance]
On December 1, 2000, the Black Troy State College in Montgomery (re-named Troy University in April 2004) opened a $10 million Rosa Parks Library and monument. Attending the dedication was the state’s first Jewish Governor, Don Siegelman, who praised Parks. Coretta Scott King said that this incident launched her husband’s civil rights career and added: "By the sheer force of her will, she set in motion a revolution that continues to this day." (Note: She could have and should have also thanked the Communist Party school which trained Parks.)
Parks is called "the mother of the civil rights movement." Both NAACP head Kweisi Mfume, who has five children by five different women (and never married to any of them), and Jesse Jackson (who is also the father of an illegitimate child) attended. Earlier, Clinton had presented Miss Parks with the Congressional Gold Medal of Honor.
An old city bus like the one Parks rode on is displayed in the museum. Children are now brought aboard the bus, where a harsh, recorded voice tells all Blacks to move to the back. This is designed to instill feelings of guilt and self-hate in White children.
Commentary: It's apparent that just as the Communist associations of Martin Luther King have been downplayed and suppressed, likewise Rosa Parks has been similarly "sanitized". Sanitizing history produces distorted viewpoints and unrealistic expectations. There is no need to sanitize or inflate black history; The First Freedom acknowledges in another column that blacks have made remarkable progress in 139 years. It can also be patronizing to blacks to wrongfully attribute events or inventions to them in a vain attempt to "placate" them. I suspect that, just like the rest of us, they would prefer to know the truth.
And who is responsible for the manipulation of black history? Certainly there are Afrocentrics within the black community who have an interest in this. However, in his recent column Why I Hate Blacks, which stirred up much controversy in the San Francisco Bay Area, Kenneth Eng wrote "it is rather troubling that they [blacks] are treated as heroes, but then again, whites will do anything to defend them". This implies that the white elite, the "baby boomers", have also been quite instrumental in this historical manipulation. And why is this? I suggest that when boomers watched blacks express their gratitude for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by burning down our cities during the late '60s, they became psychologically traumatized, and so they treat blacks with kid gloves because they're afraid that blacks might "snap" and go ballistic over a slight at a drop of the hat. However, this attitude overlooks two factors. First, it was only a small minority of blacks who engaged in these destructive activities during the '60s. And second, it was mostly BLACK communities that were burned down. Blacks were actually the FOREMOST victims of the riots. Unfortunately, several aspects of modern black culture, particularly rap music, perpetuates negative stereotypes about the black community, because rap is so aggressive, intrusive, and offensive. The disproportionately high crime rate among blacks, exposed and analyzed in Jared Taylor's critically-acclaimed research report "The Color of Crime" further aggravates tensions.
It's time we in the white community quit feeling guilty about events we had nothing to do with. It's time for us within the white community to quit treating blacks with kid gloves. We need to deal with them straight up, without either patronization or abuse. Being pro-white does not require that we be anti-black or anti-Latino or anti-anyone else, but it does require us to be pro-white. How can we be racially neutral when the other side plays the race card? That's like asking us to fight with one hand tied behind our back. We need to defend ourselves when wrongfully attacked. Turning the other cheek doesn't require us to take an ass-whipping. It simply requires us to stop and give the other side one opportunity to clarify their position and withdraw gracefully from the conflict. That's why we have only two cheeks. When Jesus said "forgive someone seventy times seven", He was merely being facetious. We are NOT required to take endless abuse.
Click HERE to learn more about how you can get "The First Freedom" newspaper.
Tags: culture , black history , diversity , race