Letters for the week of June 11-17, 2003

“Rich, Black, Flunking.” Feature, 5/21

The critical response of many black leaders and some of the Shaker Heights parents confirms John Ogbu’s findings. Many blacks are prone to believe that racism alone is to blame for black kids’ failures. Who among us thinks this prejudice is not communicated in the home, in casual but meaningful remarks disparaging teachers, administrators, and the school district as a whole? As a former teacher and counselor, I know these comments are often made by black parents, because the black students repeat them in class.

These must be seen as more than just criticisms, often well-deserved, of a white institution or white faculty. They indicate a broad range of actions and inactions by these black parents. I have seen disputes between teachers and students, and the black parents Ogbu speaks of are the ones who use these disputes to question the qualification of teachers and schools to educate. A persistent message that questions the legitimacy of public schools is bound to have an effect on any child. Again, listen to what the kids say in class.

Black leaders would argue that Ogbu is blaming black children and excusing the “white” institution. This is code, designed for those same parents, who will repeat the argument in the home and make the child blame poor grades on racist teachers and a racist school.
Lowell Denny, Oakland

We seem to have seven blind men and an elephant. The elephant: academic failure of black students of high socioeconomic status. The blind men:

Blind man 1: The cause of academic failure is low teacher expectations and/or an indifferent educational establishment.

Blind man 2: The cause of academic failure is the black culture of victimhood.

Blind man 3: The cause of academic failure is educational abandonment of black children by their parents.

Blind man 4: The cause of academic failure is societal racism and discrimination.

Blind man 5: The cause of academic failure is low school funding.

Blind man 6: The cause of academic failure is unqualified teachers.

Blind man 7: The cause of academic failure is peer pressure.

Blind man number 8, poverty, does not have a place around this elephant. Nor should Blind man number 5, but one of the persons quoted put him there. Is it possible that the cause of academic failure is all of the above, in varying degree with each student? Yet each person in this story had his/her pet theory of what the elephant looks like, and none is willing to consider anyone else’s.

As a descendant of the “involuntary immigrants” called slaves, let me inform Mr. Ogbu of this fact. Every black child who is such a descendant is informed from the moment of his/her birth that he and his people have no culture; that the language of their ancestors was ooga-booga gibberish; that their religion was superstition and voodoo; that they never invented anything or accomplished anything; that the best thing that ever happened to us was to be dragged kicking and screaming into slavery; and that the most we could hope for is to become the best imitation white man we could be.

Some blacks, such as McWhorter, Steele, the Powells, and Condoleezza Rice, have internalized this view. But for most of us, we realized that when the standard of black success is how white we are in language, deportment, values, and beliefs, then there is something wrong — and yes, racist — in that view. Name one black American descendant of “involuntary migrants” (as opposed to an African who immigrated to a country that would not have permitted him to immigrate in the year he was born) who is a success in the white world, or a success by white standards, who is firmly rooted in black culture, outside of sports, entertainment, or the arts. Between dreams deferred and caged birds singing, we can’t hear any freedom bells ringing.

By the way, what are McWhorter’s and Steele’s claims to fame other than being racial and racist attack dogs for right-wingers? Why did you seek these two Toms out for commentary?
Victor C. Anderson, Oakland

I can’t compliment you enough on your Ogbu article on his study of black students in Shaker Heights. It’s not only a great, in-depth feature; it’s a great service to the black community and to our country. Unfortunately, I suspect that you too will get hit with the “racist” label in the knee-jerk reactions by many who can’t escape the politically correct dogmas that they have been brainwashed with. But the truth has to be put out there before any real healing and corrective action can take place. You have my admiration for having the courage to print this.
George Tamas, Santa Barbara

I think there’s something missing in the entire debate you describe. Just for full disclosure, I’m not an academic, not an educator, not black, and have never been in Shaker Heights. That should disqualify me from participating in this discourse except, perhaps, for the fact that I was an “involuntary immigrant.”

What’s missing here, and in so many discussions of education, is anything about the purpose of education and how that relates to student motivation. There is a clue in the critics’ argument that many of the black parents are first-generation college graduates. The parents’ motivation was clearly to escape from the underclass, but their children no longer need to do that.

If we want these children to take education seriously, we have to stop playing the blame game and stop looking at education as the road to a law degree or MBA. We must instill in all children the joy of learning for its own sake. Not all children need to be turned on to all subjects. I’ve known quite a few kids who were bookworms who insisted: “Math is not for me.” They’ll do all right. On the other hand, I was inspired by a ninth-grade algebra teacher who had us play mathematical games. Of course, I didn’t have to face the dilemma of choosing between Standard and any other English, because I didn’t know any kind of English when I arrived in this country at the age of twelve and, fortunately, math is nonverbal.

Who is responsible for setting off the spark that makes a child want to learn? The parents? The school? The black community? The larger community? Everybody who has the ability to do so.
Gilbert Bendix, Kensington

When discussing the failure of blacks to perform in rich academic environments, he accurately put the majority of the blame squarely on the black family and community. My own family has produced some outstanding academic performers in spite of lack of opportunity and community support. The root of our success was our parental involvement. Both of our parents encouraged us to strive for good grades and higher knowledge in spite of their own lack of background. Of course there were intense negative environmental factors from both blacks and whites at all levels. Blacks would ask “Why do you read so much?” Whites would actually say “You’re not black, you’re a white man in a black man suit!” I’m not making this up! I’ve heard these and much worse from both groups my whole life. As one of the few blacks who succeeded at nuclear power school, I have been a target of academic envy most of my adult life, again from both groups.

I would love to contact Professor Ogbu for an interview. At least he would hear from one person that he was right.
Morgan Johnson, Aiken, SC

I read your article and could see why the Shaker Heights parents were upset with Ogbu’s findings. First, they picked the wrong person for the study. Ogbu, by his own admission, is not an educator. Second, he is of the voluntary immigrant class who rarely understand the black experience in America. Those parents could have saved themselves some pain by picking up Beverly Tatum’s book, Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?
Kwame Seku, Oakland

It is a shame that a man of what appears obvious integrity is being vilified for exposing some troublesome questions. The parents ought to be looking at what they can do to change themselves. Good job in spreading important questions for thoughtful people.
Paul Peterson, Tacoma, WA

My congratulations to Susan Goldsmith for a provocative, well-researched, well-sourced article — and to the Express for having the courage to print it.
Jim Grodnik, San Lorenzo

Thank you for running your article “Voodoo Doctor.” It was a very good, informative piece, but extremely distressing. The fact that more and more people are now resisting the dogma of secularism and recognizing that their maladies may have spiritual causes is a positive trend; however, that increasing numbers are availing themselves of treatments and alleged exorcisms like those offered by Sharon Caulder, the voodoo chief of your article, is extraordinarily dangerous.

The world of exotic religions, deities, rites, and healing practices is one with which I’m intimately familiar, having spent twenty years teaching and working in various traditions, including time spent studying and practicing in India. I’ve taught college courses in both Eastern and Western religions and published in the subject. More importantly, I’ve had direct experience with the sort of spirit work, and spirit realm, Dr. Caulder specializes in, so I hope that what I’m about to say carries some weight.

The noncorporeal entities that Dr. Caulder works with are quite real. The invasion they can make into our lives — into our bodies, our thoughts, our physical environment — are quite real. The damage they can do is pervasive and encompassing and can, as the article itself suggests, drive their human subjects to states of madness, acts of crime, and even suicide. These are deadly, hateful spirits intent on our ruin. What your readers must be made aware of, however, is that ALL of the gods and goddesses of voodoo, and of all forms of Cultural Spiritism, as well as the devas of Hinduism, the archetypal gods of neo-paganism, and so on, are in fact malevolent demons of this category. That there are within these pantheons “benevolent” spirits and “malevolent” spirits is an untruth, as is the belief that any of them are divine or aspects or expansions of God. They are all malevolent. Many of them affect a false persona of holiness or divinity and deceive people this way, and can evoke in their subjects temporary sensations of well-being or even visions and ecstasies. The ones that pose as females, the so-called “mother” goddesses so in vogue these days, are among the most malicious and, were their true identities unmasked, horrifying.

In healings such as those performed by Dr. Caulder, symptoms may indeed appear to abate. This is an illusion, however. The demon causing the initial malady will cease its activity for a time in order to give the impression that the “exorcism” was effective. In this way, the innocent client is gradually drawn deeper into the belief system and inspired to adopt more and more of its practices. This in fact gives the demon more power, which after a period suitable to its purposes it WILL come back and exert, with disastrous, even fatal, results to the client. Demons like this cannot be controlled by the rituals of Cultural Spiritist traditions; they merely induce the victim, and usually even the healer, to think they are. Treatments like this always backfire. We tend not to ever hear about this stage in clients’ illnesses because by this time they’ve stopped frequenting the healer.

It is tragic beyond imagining that Magi — the client described in your article — after having grown up in an environment of satanic ritual abuse (also quite real, unfortunately), would seek a remedy from this horror in more occult practices. If she continues in this way, her suffering will increase exponentially, because the very presences she sought to dispel are only being given more power over her, though in new disguises. It is tragic, too, that Sharon Caulder should believe that voodoo is her “ancestral religion.” It is no one’s. God — real God, not some multi-armed grotesquery or snake-encircled someone, but God … you know, GOD — is her true ancestral religion. It is God who created us all and loves us all dearly, especially Sharon Caulder and Magi, because they both have been so terribly damaged by their childhood occult experiences. And it is this very God who can, and will, dispel malevolent spirits, in simple, wholesome, holy, and beautiful ways. And in extraordinarily inexpensive ways. Repeated visits to spiritist, shamanic, energy, etc. healers will cost the client hundreds, or even (usually) thousands of dollars. The methods which actually WORK to get these ghoulies out, on the other hand, will set one back about twenty dollars at most. The cost of an ordinary rosary, a prayer card, a vial to hold some holy water.

I implore all your readers who are tempted to visit healers like Sharon Caulder to please, please desist. And I implore Dr. Caulder herself to please discontinue this voodoo practice — for your own sake and for the sake of the many people it affects. Anyone who for any reason suspects they are under spiritual attack, who experiences persistent nightmares or nocturnal disturbances, internal voices, or thoughts that don’t sound like their own, inexplicable fears or panics, a sense of existential “darkness” around them, etc., should under no circumstances visit a practitioner who works with spirits or “gods” or “energies.” It’s like pouring gasoline on a fire. They need to avail themselves of what is holy. And they can begin the process by doing three very simple things. First, they should wear a Marian medal called the “Miraculous Medal.” The Virgin Mary is fantastically powerful against demonic powers; they’re terrified of her. Second, they should pray the rosary every day. It takes about twenty minutes. Third, they should pray to God, real God, to help them. That starts the process.
Barbara Powell, San Leandro

I can’t believe that Kara Platoni really believes Alan Young, even if he is “the smoothest celebrity-impersonating criminal ever to work Alameda County,” should be in prison [see also the “The Talented Mr. Young,” March 27, 2002]. By all reports he’s just a brilliant con man, preying on well-heeled citizens and not even very successfully. Come on. Because of policies and practices shaped by people who share Ms. Platoni’s perspective, the number of people in California’s prisons has grown over the past thirty years from under 20,000 to over 160,000. As the prison budget’s share of the state general fund has doubled, higher education’s share has shrunk to almost half of what it was. Tossing yet another person in prison for a nonviolent offense just doesn’t make sense.
Naneen Karraker, Berkeley