The Batchelor Pad Radio Network

"Educating, Empowering, Entertaining and Informing you on topics that affect our lives"


view:  full / summary


Posted on June 9, 2019 at 2:20 PM Comments comments (0)

Gary Norris Gray


OAKLAND, CA.- The (LPGA) Ladies Professional Golf Association came out swinging this week as Hank Haney professional caddy and golf trainer tried to disparage a number of Korean golfers. Korean-American professional golfer Michelle Wie would have none of it and challenged Haney. This man still has not learned the lesson that we are a multi- cultured country with many different ethnicities that make this nation great. Once again we stumble on the racial staircase of life. Mr. Haney has to have his coat-tails pulled to explain himself. Haney was just following in the footsteps of others and got caught.


Hank+Haney+z_y8uzm0twvmHank Haney


It has happened again this week with, Hank Haney, a longtime golf instructor and Tiger Woods' former coach, caught the attention of many after he made racist and sexist comments about women's golf during his radio show Wednesday.


seoul sistersSeoul Sisters


Haney was asked who would win the U.S. Open this weekend. His response was "a Korean I could not name you like uh, six players on the LPGA Tour. Nah, Maybe I could. Well I'd go with Li, if I didn't have to name a first name. I'd get a bunch of 'em right." No Mr. Hank Haney you would have gotten them all wrong because none of them are named Li, try again. Now if he meant Lee then maybe six or seven but that does not excuse your comment of disrespecting the work and dedication that these ladies put into their craft.


koLydia Ko


For the record there are over twenty South Korean Nationals on the LPGA golf tour and many others like Korean-Australian Minjee Lee, Korean-Canadian Jaclyn Lee, Korean-New Zealander Lydia Ko, and Korean-Americans Michelle Wie, Annie Park, Alison Lee, Lauren Kim, and Danielle Kang.


220px-Minjee_Lee_(42139200431)Minjee Lee


As for the Li-Lee comment he still got it wrong because there are seven in the 150 list. Li is a Chinese not a Korean sir name. These are the seven Korean players with the sir name, Lee, Jaclyn Lee, Minjee Lee, Alison Lee, Jeongeun Lee6, Mi Hyang Lee, Mirim Lee, Jeong Eun Lee


Michelle Wie added: "Too many of these girls, Korean or not, have worked countless hours and sacrificed so much to play in the U.S. Open this week. There are so many amazing players in the field. Let's celebrate them... Not mock them."


This will most likely go over Mr. Haney's head because he does not understand the pain and hurt that he has caused by his callous statement.


Mr. Haney should have known better in the political times of "ME TOO" and "TIMES UP." With our esteem leader at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Mr. Haney is permitted to say anything about the great Korean golfers without suffering the consequences. He has every right to think this way but never should have made it public.


The history continues if individuals cannot control and win the game these same individuals trash the game or the people who make the game great. It happened twenty five years ago in golf when Tiger Woods took the game of golf by storm and won more championships in ten years more than any other professional golfer in history. Not good enough, Woods had to be brought back to earth with a scandal.


It happened with the Williams Sisters climbed up the tennis majors victory latter with Serena's 23 victories. This year Ms. Williams is within one major victory away from the queen Margaret Court.


It happened when Black players dominated basketball and baseball winning championships in the 1970s and 1980s after the unwritten quota system on the floor and on the field ended.


PAKSe Ri Pak


It happened in 1998 when female golfing Rookie of the Year, Se Ri Pak from South Korea took the ladies professional tour by storm which created a backlash in 2008 against the Asian golfers. The (LPGA) Ladies Professional Golfing Association put forth a ruling that was surprising and confusing. Lady golfers had to pass an English proficiency test and it became a world tour issue. This was aimed directly at the Asian golfers because few spoke English at that time.


This test was never required by the British Commonwealth countries or American golfers. The ruling was contested by the Korean, Chinese, and Taiwanese national golf organizations and dropped in 2010 with a protest lead by the State of California. The legislators of California informed the LPGA that they could not hold sanction tournaments in the Golden State if this rule stood.


Mr. Trump has allowed this full scale attack on any minority accomplishment in the United States. We as Americans have to continue to point this out and expose these thoughts whenever possible, Michelle Wie has done that.


Michelle Wie and Samantha Marks did not waste time and twitted, Wie stated, "As a Korean-American female golfer, these comments disappoint and anger me on so many levels. Racism and sexism are no laughing matter Hank.... Shame on you. I don't ever do this, but this must be called out."


Other females in the professional golfing fraternity came to Michelle's aid like Marks and exposed the contradiction of Mr. Haney's comments, like they are very good golfers BUT they are Asian. That BUT gets in the way every time. It is like baseball's Hall of Fame Oakland A's-New York Yankees base stealer Ricky Henderson, stating he is a great baseball player BUT he speaks in the third person about himself. Does that diminish his baseball skills? NO, but Haney and many others continue to use that BUT to downgrade the accomplishments of minority athletes.


Haney finally apologized after the firestorm, stating, "This morning I made some comments about women's professional golf and its players that were insensitive and that I regret. In an effort to make a point about the overwhelming success of Korean players on the tour I offended people and I am sorry I have the highest respect for the women who have worked so hard to reach the pinnacle of their sport and I never meant to take away from their abilities and accomplishments."


The tide is slowly turning like in the late 1960s but it will take more incidents like this to open the eyes of America to racial, social, and spiritual harmony.


P.S. Haney was suspended Friday by Sirius XM Satellite PGA Tour Radio for his comments


Want to know more about Korean golfers go to these websites and


Thanks- Bleacher Report article by Adam Wells


Gary Norris Gray - Writer, Author, Historian, Gibbs Magazine-Oakland, California and New England Informer- Boston, Mass. THE GRAYLINE:- The Analects of A Black Disabled Man, The Gray Leopard Cove, and The Batchelor Pad Network, Disabled Community Activist. Email [email protected]


©Copyrighted Gary Norris Gray @ Gray Leopard Prod.

Gentrification encroaches on Howard and Texas Southern Campuses

Posted on June 9, 2019 at 2:00 PM Comments comments (0)

Washington, D.C., apparently is the capital of the Gentrification Nation too.


Want to see the effects? Just take a stroll through the environs near Howard University’s main campus these days and you reflexively say, “My, how times have changed.”


Gone are many of the decaying structures and dilapidated blotches of disrepair. And gone are some of the small black businesses and shops that were the lifeblood of a once-vibrant community.


Look up and you will see high-rise thickets of fancy apartment complexes dotting the landscape around Howard, which in recent years has sold some of its properties near campus to raise funds. Look down and you will see the new cafes and coffee shops.


Those are signs of gentrification, not only in Washington but also in cities such as Houston, home of Texas Southern University, another historically black institution.



To understand the change of scenery around Howard, you must study the metamorphosis of Washington as a whole.



Check the city’s gentrification numbers. According to the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, which advocates economic support for economically distressed locales, Washington had the highest intensity of gentrifying neighborhoods in the United States between 2000 and 2013.


Furthermore, Washington’s population was 71.1% black in 1970; in 2015, that number had plummeted to 48.3% during this new age of gentrification and black displacement. Also, the white population in areas surrounding Howard’s main campus was about 4% in 2000; by 2015, it had increased more than sixfold.


Of the eligible tracts for gentrification, Washington leads the nation with a 40% intensity rate; second is San Diego, double digits behind at 29%; third is New York at 24%.


Gentrification can mean new residents. With different cultural likes, dislikes, habits. And behavior.


Such as dog walking.


Howard students know this firsthand. And they don’t like it.


Because their campus has been a dog park for some area residents — white pet owners.


Students say it’s their grass and their walkways, regardless of the gentrification projects that have altered the landscape surrounding the university.


“Seeing dogs on campus isn’t an uncommon thing. I have seen them relieve themselves and the owners don’t pick it up,” Kenneth Fling, a freshman psychology major from Buffalo, New York, told The Undefeated outside on a breezy, blue-sky day at the main campus. “Here, we take the culture of our campus and our community very seriously.”


The first part of Fling’s comment is a key point of contention among many Howard students: non-student pet owners allowing their dogs to defecate and urinate on campus apparently without taking any responsibility.



The Yard on Howard University is located at the center of main campus, surrounded by public spaces where fraternities and sororities emblazon trees with their insignia.




On “The Yard” — that priceless, grassy commons — which students consider hallowed territory, the pulse of their universe.


Call this situation Howard’s get-off-my-lawn moment.


It would be foolhardy to believe that Howard was the nation’s only historically black college or university in a dense urban spot feeling the effects of a culture clash that’s exacerbated by gentrification. Travel about 1,500 miles southwest of Washington to Houston, the nation’s fourth-largest city.


There, Texas Southern University is in the throes of its own challenges that, in some respects, are more problematic than the dog issue at Howard.


Houston’s Third Ward, where Texas Southern is located, is in the midst of a multimillion-dollar renovation plan.


While the hot topic at Howard is about the pets, the concern at Texas Southern is about the pocketbooks.


According to the Houston Defender, a black-owned newspaper in the city, the number of black residents in the Third Ward, as of 2017, had decreased by at least 10% while the white population had doubled, as education and income levels have risen. Other effects of gentrification can include an increase in home and property values, an improvement in safety matters and a rise in credit ratings for residents.


However, on the other side of the ledger … well, let Sherridan Schwartz, a visiting professor in the Barbara Jordan-Mickey Leland School of Public Affairs at Texas Southern, tell it:


“In recent years,” Schwartz told The Undefeated, “luxury development and gentrification have made the Third Ward mostly unaffordable to the faculty and staff of TSU [except for a few executive-level administrators with higher incomes]. Now those employed by TSU have to find more affordable housing farther away, primarily in Houston’s suburbs like Pearland and Missouri City.”


To compound the gentrified problems, public transportation, especially bus service, can be affected in a negative way. Food and utility prices can skyrocket.


Also, in some neighborhoods around Texas Southern, similar to incidents in Washington, new residents have vehemently complained about publicly played music, lingering crowds, noise and block parties — often staples of many predominantly black communities.


Darnell Latney knows all about those staples.


For 48 years, Latney has been a part of Georgia Avenue, a street that directly borders Howard’s main campus. He’s seen the full scope of changes on this thoroughfare, which stimulate much-heated debate in the neighborhood, Latney said. A barber for 22 years, he works at Joseph’s Barber Shop, mere steps away from the university. And he is adamant about what he calls a disservice to a longtime predominantly black community encompassing Howard.




Darnell Latney stands in front of a building on the 2800 block of Georgia Avenue across from Howard University where he and other barbers cut hair for years. The shop closed last year, according to Latney, at the same time the condos (on the right) were being built.




“It’s all about economics and raising the tax base,” Latney passionately told The Undefeated. “They are just using gentrification to get rid of black people in this area. We are not being displaced but replaced.


“At one time, D.C. wasn’t like this at all, from about the 1990s on back. Now everything is so expensive that the average black person can’t afford it. Georgia Avenue is a long street. It used to be an 80% black neighborhood that catered to 80% black businesses. Not anymore. I’ve seen a lot of black businesses close down in the past six years on Georgia Avenue — all because of gentrification. And this dog stuff is another sign of what’s going on around here.”


The tension regarding Howard’s dog controversy ratcheted up even more when dog owner Sean Grubbs-Robishaw, a white man who lives nearby in the Bloomingdale neighborhood, announced it was time to relocate.


No, not him — the 152-year-old Howard campus should depart, he proclaimed.


In an interview with television station Fox 5 DC, Grubbs-Robishaw, who admitted to traversing Howard’s various open patches of grass with his dog to reach a nearby reservoir that’s a popular spot for pet owners, barked, “So, they’re in part of D.C., so they have to work within D.C. If they don’t want to be within D.C., then they can move the campus. I think we just need to work together, and I don’t think it should be a he or there or here . . . it’s our community, and that’s how it should be.”


Yes, he jolted us when he said “move the campus,” the higher-education domain of such illustrious Howard alumni as poet Paul Laurence Dunbar, singer Roberta Flack, former U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Mike Espy and California Sen. Kamala Harris. And note that Grubbs-Robishaw has since been derisively referred to by a hashtag on social media: #GentrifyingGeorge.


“They [dog owners] just don’t realize that this is sacred ground,” Hidaya, a Howard student who didn’t want her last name used, told The Undefeated.


The temperature of these dog days had gotten so hot that several media outlets, from Essence magazine to MTV News to The Guardiannewspaper in England, have carved out space for coverage. And a petition has even been started to effect change regarding the dog debate.


Ironically, while students and dog owners on Howard’s main campus have been in the midst of a seemingly adversarial relationship, on the university’s so-called West Campus, located in a traditionally wealthier community that houses Howard’s law and divinity schools about 3 miles away, students and dog owners have maintained a symbiotic association.


“We do events each year when, during final exams, area dog owners bring their dogs over so we can pet them,” second-year law student James Walker III of Atlanta told The Undefeated.


For stress relief.


Does it work?


“I don’t partake in it myself, but I’m sure it helps, as the data has shown it works,” said Walker, whose parents both graduated from Howard’s School of Law.


Final exams are scheduled this week and next.



Walker said it isn’t unusual to see dogs on the grounds of Howard’s West Campus, a predominantly white area off Connecticut Avenue, and added there’s a communal environment with the neighbors.


There doesn’t appear to be an antagonistic relationship with the surrounding West Campus community, he said.


There could be three reasons, besides the communal engagement:


The much smaller West Campus is a bit more isolated than the more open and sprawling main campus, which, of course, draws more foot traffic.

The dog owners on the west side appear to be very responsible in picking up waste material from their dogs.

The West Campus isn’t in the crosshairs of gentrification projects, unlike the main Howard campus.

The dog conundrum on the main campus became so polarizing that university president Wayne A.I. Frederick publicly announced that pet owners are prohibited from bringing their animals on the grounds.


He said: “We recognize that service animals are a necessary aspect of modern-day life and we will accommodate them as needed. We appreciate pet owners respecting our campus by not bringing pets on to the private areas. Howard is a private institution nestled in the heart of an urban city and we’ve shared a long-standing positive relationship with our evolving community for more than 150 years, which we look forward to continuing in the future.”


However, a few students indicated that they still have seen some non-student pet owners and dogs on the main site after the release of the president’s message, although freshman Fling observed, “I have seen a decline in dogs on campus.”


The animal regulations imposed by city’s Department of Health, in association with the mayor’s office, appear to be on Frederick’s side.


Alison Reeves, interim director and public information officer in the office of communications and community relations for DC Health, told The Undefeated, after consultation with the agency’s general counsel, that “the leash law applies to dogs off of their own fenced property. The pet waste laws apply to anyone off of their own property. Whether anyone is or is not allowed on Howard’s campus is a function of whatever rules Howard would have in place and provide notice of to the public. Any person on private property could be considered to be trespassing if not allowed on the property, but that would be up to Howard to enforce.”


Much of this issue between dog owners and students revolves around respect and reverence in the nation’s capital, which now doubles as the Gentrification Capital.


Howard freshman Ahzaria Garris, a criminology major from Norfolk, Virginia, told The Undefeated:


“It’s the principle behind the situation with the dog owners. They don’t interact with us; they don’t even look our way. They seem to keep tunnel vision, minding their business and just hurrying along. If they interacted with us and actually cared about the school, it would be different.”


Simply put, Howard students don’t want their main campus to go to the dogs.




Posted on June 4, 2019 at 10:40 PM Comments comments (0)

Gary Norris Gray- BASN Staff Reporter


Nationally known golf commentator, swing coach, and Tiger Woods former golf teacher doubled down on what he said last week about the professional ladies golfing tour. Haney apologized last week but now seems hollow and meaningless after his renewed attack and rant Monday morning. He stated, “That his prediction, a Korean named Lee would win the tournament and was actually based on statistics and facts.” Hank Haney should be fired from his Sirius XM radio show because he will not leave this alone. The suspended Haney continues to belittle the (LPGA) Ladies Professional Golf Association and that should not be acceptable. He continues to disrespect the ladies on the tour and the country of South Korea; this also should not be acceptable.


Mr. Haney refuses to take responsibility for his careless and hurtful comments because he keeps digging, keeps pushing the agenda to disparage women’s golf. He is just following in the footsteps of Donald J. Trump and the President does not answer to anyone.


Former LPGA player Jeehae Lee remarked on Twitter, “This is why Haney’s comments hurt: by publicly admitting that he sees a bunch of the same ‘Lee’s on the LPGA, he has normalized the view that these women on the LPGA are nameless, faceless, golfing robots who aren’t worthy of individual humanity.”

Former KLPGA and LPGA golfer Christina Kim states ”


‘Oh, those Koreans are all the same,’ are just too lazy or narrow-minded to make the effort to get to know the individuals. It also bugs me that the Koreans are collectively demonized as ‘robotic’ because they spend so much time trying to improve as players,”


It is very interesting that the golf world did not complain when Tiger Woods ran away with so many championships on the men’s tour 15 years ago. Woods changed the game with his muscle power producing longer tee shots, now most of the men have longer tee shots. This is the same with retired LPGA Champion Se Ri Pak and her long tee shots following Tigers practice methods.


It is a disgrace a golf commentator could not name any of the female Korean golfers by their first name, Hank you are the lead commentator on the GOLF CHANNEL, that is your job.

O.K. let’s go there 1.) Jeongeun Lee6 won the U.S. Open Sunday and is the first Korean woman named LEE to win a tournament in 2019. Lee6 received her name because there are five other Korean golfers named Jeongeun Lee. Lee6 has her own fan club called the Lucky 6. Mr. Haney tired to used this as an excuse.


2.) This year there have been six other South Koreans that have won tournaments this year and none of them have the last name LEE, guess Mr. Haney forgot about that.


3.) There are only three South Koreans named LEE in the top 30 golf list so it would not be hard to call them by their first name. Minjee Lee, Mi Hyang Lee, and Mirim Lee. Hank, you are telling the public that you cannot remember these names.


The LPGA has to make a hard steadfast decision and that is keeping a relationship with the Sirius XM Radio or dropping the station. Mr. Haney does not respect the women’s golf game. He does not respect the South Koreans. The (LPGA) organization needs somebody to speak on radio in a positive and uplifting way for younger females to follow and the rich history of past champions, Hank Haney is not it.


This has to end now.


P.S. Special Thanks Washington Post


Gary Norris Gray – Writer, Author, Historian, Gibbs Magazine-Oakland, California and New England Informer- Boston, Mass. THE GRAYLINE:- The Analects of A Black Disabled Man, The Gray Leopard Cove, Soul Tree Radio In The Raw, and The Batchelor Pad Network, Disabled Community Activist. Email [email protected]


©Copyrighted Gary Norris Gray @ Gray Leopard Prod

The moral case for profit-sharing (part II)

Posted on June 4, 2019 at 10:35 PM Comments comments (0)

"To whom much is given, much is expected."


by Dr. Larry Fedewa (June 1, 2019)


Last week we discussed the antecedents of the current movement toward corporate social responsibility and the Conscious Capitalist movement and also the paradigm on which a moral claim can be made for a re-definition of "workers' rights" with respect to workers' share of the company's profits.


The paradigm is the company's products and services offerings. The moral claim is the right of every person (or legal entity) to be compensated in the same proportion as that person's efforts contributed to the profit or loss from the company's total activities. A simplistic example would be a company profit of $1,000 divided equally by 100 people (or entities) who contributed to the sale of the product. Each share would then be $10.00.


Obviously no product line or service is the result of equal contributions by all the people who have been involved with the offering. Such an assignment of the many varied values which produce the products amounts to a quantification of each party's input to the profit or loss experienced by the entire enterprise. Not only are many qualities difficult to quantify, such as risk and perseverance, but some, such as loyalty and teamwork, would seem to have no metric at all. Some are unique, such as creativity; others, such as availability and skills, are competitive and subject to supply and demand. The decisions made by some are critical to both survival and success, while others are routine and conventional.


Nevertheless, if profit-sharing is to become the basis for a new interpretation of workers' rights, some intelligible and mutually agreeable formulas must be used. Rather than attempt a summary and rationalization of the many different formulas which have been used and conceived by firms during the robust history of profit-sharing, it seems equally necessary to examine the ethical basis which underlies the need to engage in this practice in the first place.

Economists link the creation of wealth since the Industrial Revolution to increases in productivity, the multiplication of output per unit of effort. The most often used unit of effort is the human labor hour. Since the common characteristic of most technological innovations is the reduction of the human labor required to complete a task, productivity is closely connected to technology. In the modern era, technology in turn is more and more closely connected with the sciences.


Whereas earlier productivity was usually associated with individual capabilities, such as footspeed, native intelligence, or instinct - as in logging, fishing, plowing and many other trades - technology-based productivity is based on devices which themselves already incorporate such physical or skill-based characteristics.


This approach thus introduces a far more complex process to the production of any saleable outcome, including services. There is an entire process of innovation which precedes what we think of as human labor, a process which involves risk, originality, perseverance, promulgation and eventually marketing and sales. It is only after all this that new products are placed into a traditional business setting for design, fabrication, marketing, sales, repair and warranty services.


What has happened in our current business practice is that more and more of the rewards for the enormous gains in productivity which have dominated our civilization in the post-WWII era have gone to the inventors and owners of the new technologies, less and less to the average workers. Yet, no one disputes the fact that, without the workers, the actual implementation of these technologies would never have happened. Because there are more of these folks, and because the skills needed to perform in a high-tech world are more available among the masses of workers, their contributions are typically rewarded at roughly the same level as the loggers and farmers of an earlier era.

But why are they not entitled to a greater share of the gains which these increases in productivity have brought to life in the public square? After all, without them, these innovations would still be unknown, condemned to eternal obscurity. By what right do the owners (investors) get to determine that they are entitled to 80% of the firm's assets while the workers - whose role is also critically important to the success or failure of the enterprise - collectively receive 20% or less?


These are human beings, not robots, not slaves, not units to be discarded or exploited. The old "survival of the fittest" logic does not belong, is not expected, and is not tolerated in today's capitalism. Each company, each organization, each business is based on a culture akin more to a family or a tribe than to a 20th century factory. After all, we spend more time at work than at home, at play, or in social activities. More of our lives with our fellow workers than with our families.


Success in the business world of this new century demands the pride of accomplishment, respect for the dignity of work, and a company culture which strives to promote the human goals of joy and even love of one's fellows. These are the coming, growing companies, the ones which will survive and thrive in the dawning of the new day.


In addition, because of the way our economy is organized, American business as a whole is bound to rise or fall on the basis on the working class' ability to participate comfortably in our ever-growing consumer economy. It is thus in everyone's interest to amend our definition of Workers' Rights to include a new condition - the right to calibrate employee compensation to the success or failure of the total enterprise in terms not only of satisfaction or failure, but also of profit or loss. Remember, in the new Capitalism, everyone who receives a wage - whether "leaders" (the new term for "managers") or "team members" is a "worker". The old terms do not fit this new business model.


Another unspoken result of this practice is the fulfillment of the American President's plea to "Buy American". If American workers have the means to continue their traditional support of our consumer economy, the value of tariff wars and harm from trade deficits will gradually fade away as we become again self-sufficient. Let the rest of the world look on in envy, and let Karl Marx turn over in his grave as his "workers' paradise" comes to life in the very system he so thoroughly condemned.


© 2019 Richfield Press LLC. All rights reserved.

Conscious Capitalism: The Moral Case (Part I)

Posted on May 26, 2019 at 11:20 AM Comments comments (0)

Updating workers' rights

By Dr. Larry Fedewa (May 25, 2019)

Until now, we have been exploring the case for Conscious Capitalism on the basis of economic necessity. It is clear that the strength (68%) of America's economy is based on consumer demand. Most of the consumer purchases in America are bought by the families of the middle class, because there are more of them and because their needs tend to cover a wide spectrum of goods and services. It is therefore critical that a majority of Americans have enough money to buy an ever-increasing supply of consumer goods and services if our economic engine is to keep on growing.


But the fact is that more and more of the available capital is ending up in the hands of the very rich, leaving the vast majority of the population with less and less disposable income. However, the consumer needs of the very rich are limited; most of their spending goes for investments and passive income. In order for our economic progress to continue to prosper, therefore, something must be done to distribute more of America's wealth to a larger proportion of America's population. The alternative is the eventual destruction of the capitalist system which has worked so well for us for the past two centuries.


There are only three alternative ways to redistribute America's wealth: 1) do nothing and continue to rely on the "free market" to distribute our wealth equitably - which it never has in human history; 2) empower the Government to collect more of the money being earned by American businesses (through high taxes on the very rich) and then being responsible for dispensing those funds as it sees fit (usually through welfare programs), or 3) reform of our capitalist system to provide for re-distribution of profits as an outcome of the normal way of doing business. While many Americans would prefer to achieve greater financial success through their own efforts rather than through a government hand-out, the mechanism by which that result can be implemented has remained elusive.


Fortunately, a new system of capitalism has been undergoing development for the past generation and has now matured into a new view of business and its role in social justice. The basis of this movement has been recognition of each worker as an individual human being, deserving of respect, loyalty, and appropriate rewards for his/her contribution to the enterprise. In the 1980's, W. Edwards Deming introduced a democratization of the production process called Total Quality Management (TQM).


This theory depended on recognition of the ideas and creativity of workers, initially on a production line, to improve the quality of the final product. As "product quality" became a major consideration in American business culture, it was frequently presented in the context of greater worker involvement. This movement spun off ever more sophisticated standards of product quality such as Six Sigma, ISO 9000, and Lean Manufacturing, among others. These "new" management theories for production also began to be applied to services organizations. I was personally involved in introducing TQM (as amended) to the federal government during the late 1980's and 1990's.


This formal focus on the individual worker was picked up and expanded by a new movement called "Conscious Capitalism" in the new century. This management theory is profoundly democratic, in that every member of the enterprise is recognized as a contributor to the common effort and is responsible for participating in the culture and the activities associated with that particular organization. This includes open meetings on finances, policies and strategies. A bedrock belief of a Conscious Capitalist is that profit is not the purpose of the business, but a necessary pre-condition for the achievement of the true mission of the company.


The mission, in turn, is viewed in the context of the company's contribution to the larger society by counting as the company's stakeholders not only the shareholders, but also the employees, the local community, their suppliers, customers, and the physical environment.


"Conscious companies" (as they call themselves) have been proven on average to be surprisingly successful in financial terms because of several factors. First, their marketing is supported by faithful, long-term customers and suppliers. Second, their personnel costs are demonstrably less because of lower executive compensation, lower turnover, "lean" middle management, and lower G&A overall, including less legal fees. Finally, these companies do not accept investors who are on a short fuse for ROI - in fact many of their shareholders are their own employees. (A very comprehensive source for becoming and maintaining a conscious company can be found in Conscious Capitalism Field Guide, by Raj Sisodia et al, Harvard Business Review Press, 2019)


The underlying factor in conscious companies is their insistence on a long-term rather than short-term perspective which is then translated into policies and actions. Some of the more prominent conscious companies are Federal Express, Southwest Airlines, Whole Foods Markets, Starbucks and 1600 others with three million employees.

That is a very brief description of a non-governmental re-distribution of wealth. There is, however, an additional case for profit-sharing: the moral case.


The moral basis of profit-sharing as the foundation of a new interpretation of "Workers' Rights" is the paradigm of a product. A product is composed of many parts, and it is the result of many contributors, i.e. the concept, the design, the assembly of the materials, the fabrication of the parts, the assembly and testing of the prototype (and perhaps each copy), as well as the marketing, sales, warranty services, replacement parts, etc.

Our moral contention is: Compensation should be granted on the basis of how much each person contributed to the entire process.


There are direct contribution costs, based on financial requirements of the people , materials and equipment. Then there are "success" and "failure" compensations based on the presence or absence of profits - the measure of the success (or not) of the project. These compensations also should be shared according to the contributions made by the individuals involved.


The traditional basis for employee pay is hours worked. The new worker's rights include a new basis: pay on the basis of employee's contribution to the overall profit of the business. The detail of calculating exactly how to measure each person's contribution to the company is truly a challenge. But the principle is simple, easy to understand - and the key to America's future.


© Richfield Press 2019. All rights reserved.


Is Conscious Capitalism ready for prime time?

Posted on May 19, 2019 at 9:20 AM Comments comments (0)

Breaking out of the pack!

By Dr. Larry Fedewa (May 18,2019)

I confess that I have caught the fervor of a convert to a new movement. As I write, speak and broadcast about Conscious Capitalism, I feel like Paul Revere as I keep hearing "Wow! I never heard of Conscious Capitalism but it sure sounds like the answer to a lot of our problems!" Among others, this is the reaction of my fellow talk show hosts who are generally very well informed.

On the other hand, however, the reform of Capitalism is much discussed and written about. Some examples from Amazon's Books: Joel Solomon's "Clean Money - reinventing power, purpose and capitalism"; Frederic Laloux's Reinventing Organizations, and Everybody Matters by Bob Chapman with Raj Sisodia (love that title).

Then, there is Joseph E. Stigliz' "Progressive Capitalism" (WSJ, April 19, 2019); a label shared with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) whose uses it to describe a concept closer to Conscious Capitalism than to Stigliz' dreary views. And, of course, the opposition still flourishes in Nick Beans' "The Fraud of Progressive Capitalism" World Socialist web site (28 April, 2019), which by the way sounds like Karl Marx with 21st century inserts. There is no room in Beams' world for an honest capitalist.

I am coming to the conclusion that the so-called Socialist trend among younger Americans which is so widely reported by the news and pollsters is really a popular name for opposition to what I have been calling the "wealth gap", i.e. the inequality of wages and other assets between the very rich and the rest of us.

This disparity is causing an expanding demand for a solution. For big government liberals, the answer is another government program, whether the guaranteed $1,000 per adult citizen of Andrew Wang or the ever- expanding welfare state of Bernie Sanders. I doubt if very many so-called supporters of "Socialism" could even define the term. They are not true Socialists; they are simply angry Americans.

They, like so many of us, have never heard of a capitalist solution to the wealth gap. Well, it's time they did! I propose Conscious Capitalism as the best way to answer that question, because it already has a history of practical accomplishment, an organizational structure, a literature describing it, and - most of all a legion of 1600 companies employing 3,000,000 people. The movement includes such outstanding companies as Southwest Airlines, Federal Express, Whole Foods and Starbucks. The best way to describe the organization is in their own words:

Conscious Capitalist Credo

"We believe that business is good because it creates value, it is ethical because it is based on voluntary exchange, it is noble because it can elevate our existence, and it is heroic because it lifts people out of poverty and creates prosperity. Free enterprise capitalism is the most powerful system for social cooperation and human progress ever conceived. It is one of the most compelling ideas we humans have ever had. But we can aspire to even more.

Conscious Capitalism is a way of thinking about capitalism and business that better reflects where we are in the human journey, the state of our world today, and the innate potential of business to make a positive impact on the world. Conscious businesses are galvanized by higher purposes that serve, align, and integrate the interests of all their major stakeholders. Their higher state of consciousness makes visible to them the interdependencies that exist across all stakeholders, allowing them to discover and harvest synergies from situations that otherwise seem replete with trade-offs. They have conscious leaders who are driven by service to the company's purpose, all the people the business touches, and the planet we all share together. Conscious businesses have trusting, authentic, innovative and caring cultures that make working there a source of both personal growth and professional fulfillment. They endeavor to create financial, intellectual, social, cultural, emotional, spiritual, physical and ecological wealth for all their stakeholders.

Conscious businesses will help evolve our world so that billions of people can flourish, leading lives infused with passion, purpose, love and creativity; a world of freedom, harmony, prosperity, and compassion." (See

This movement is idealistic, but it works. Religion is also idealistic, but it does carry a club. We all know that humans are capable not only of great good but also of great evil. One of the greatest achievements of American capitalism has been its success in limiting the excesses of capitalism. The two major forces restraining American capitalism have been laws and unions. And the way to a disciplined capitalist system in this country has been led by organized labor. Labor has been responsible for the elimination of child labor, for the 40-hour work week, for due process in firing, paid vacations, pensions and health care. It is time for Labor to take up it rightful role in reforming capitalism.

There are only two options to the distribution of wealth in this country: the coercion of government using the tax system, or voluntary reform of capitalism through a re-definition of workers' rights to include profit sharing. In Conscious Capitalism, the entire supply chain is deemed responsible for the success or failure of a business. As the major contributor to that supply chain, labor deserves a major share - either way. Conscious companies understand that equation. The difference between today's standard and the reform standard is the size and form of the labor share. That is yet to be determined, and it undoubtedly will differ according to circumstances. The best way to develop a mutually agreeable outcome for both sides is through collective bargaining.

And the role of the union is critical, because its role is non-governmental. It is the first line of defense. Only if it fails does government get involved through lawsuits and enforcement. The private sector remains private, and freedom continues to reign.

Let's do it!

The Wealth Gap (continued): Back to basics

Posted on April 8, 2019 at 7:15 PM Comments comments (0)

he middle class share of American wealth has gone to the very rich

By Dr. Larry Fedewa (April 8, 2019)

For the past three weeks, The Dr. Larry Show

( at 646-929-0130; 7 -8 pm every Wednesday) has been discussing the "wealth gap" in 2019 America. Now, it's time to get back to basics.

Q. What is the "wealth gap"?

A. This term refers to the present and growing concentration of financial assets (cash, stock, real estate, intellectual properties such as patents, copyrights, and royalties, etc.), and all forms of passive income to the control of fewer and fewer people (1% of the population) while the middle-class controls less and less of the nation's wealth. The word, "wealth", is used instead of "income", because the value of assets is frequently allowed to appreciate untouched ( e.g. to avoid taxable income). Money comes and goes in the form of income; assets are for long-term welfare.

Q. Is there really a wealth gap in America? Surely there will always be differences in wealth.

A. The changes in the proportion of the nation's wealth held by individuals over time are clearly traceable statistically. This trend can and has been analyzed by experts for decades. Currently, nearly 80% of America's wealth is held by 1% of the U.S. population.

Q. Why is that important?

A. There are two answers to this question: economic and philosophical.

a. Economic

The economic answer is that American capitalism depends on the American consumer market, which constitutes 68% of Gross National Product (GDP). The more money Americans spend on consumer goods and services, the more prosperous the country becomes. And, the more money available to the masses of American consumers, the more they can and will buy. But there is a limit to how much any individual or family will spend on consumer items - after all how many suits or cars can one person use?

After these expenditures are made by the 1%, their remaining funds are invested in other instruments, mostly for passive income (equities, pension funds, real estate, etc.). To the extent that the super-rich control all the country's wealth, therefore, to that extent there is a limit to the growth or even the stability of the consumer market and GDP.

When the consumer market begins to decline, other segments of the economy also react and the slow-down descends into recession. The only way out of this cycle is to get more money into the hands of the middle class. If nothing is done to accomplish this goal, the result could be a gradual descent into a modern form of feudalism, where everyone works for one of a few employers. They will be the masters and the rest of us the serfs. There will no longer be a capitalism to create opportunities and personal freedoms. Another potential outcome could be a socialist system where the everyone would depend on the government instead on a handful of employers. This would be an expansion of some present trends.

B. Philosophical

The philosophical justification for a widening (rather than a narrowing) of wealth distribution has to do with the preservation and growth of the capitalist economy.

1) The United States of America is the most prosperous and advanced civilization in the history of the human race. This statement is not above controversy, but overall a reasonable case can be made. The major reason for the prosperity is our practice of a modified capitalism, particularly as it is relevant to our "free" market system.

2) The American experiment of capitalism has been successful because it has found an answer to the most fundamental challenge of human governance, namely, what motivation will ensure that masses of people will work hard, produce unheard-of innovations, and do so in peace without either violence or coercion? The only system of governance which has produced such a standard of living is free market capitalism, which finds the civilizing motivation to be this: Challenging every American to be responsible for the welfare of self and family. No other system has been found to accomplish this necessity - not tribalism, tyranny, religion, socialism or communism.

3) Therefore, American capitalism is worth preserving because it works. It has enabled America to become the envy of the world. But its success and preservation depends on many other factors. Chief among these is the willingness of the population to abide by the conventions of social justice which are available to each citizen. It is this reliance which transcends the need for violence and rebellion. It is thus critical to the well-being of the republic that those in the law enforcement and intelligence forces of our country who have abused the FISA court and their own authority be indicted and punished to restore confidence in our national institutions.

4) But the most fundamental requirement of capitalism is a distribution of wealth which is in truth and perception fair and appropriately rewarding to the masses of citizens who live their lives in peace and prosperity.

Q. How do we measure "fair" and "appropriate"?

A. The most obvious measure of the validity of the distribution of wealth is a sound currency. Financial analyst Porter Stansberry makes a convincing argument that the basis for the shift of wealth from the middle class to the 1% which has occurred since 1971 is due to the decoupling of the dollar from the gold standard which was started in the 1933 by Franklin Roosevelt and completed by Richard Nixon in 1971.

With no basis in external value, the dollar ceased to be restricted by any force at all (the proverbial basket of currencies- most of which depend on the dollar in

the first place has not proven meaningful). The Federal Reserve has seen fit to print as many dollars as the time called for. This practice has resulted in a core inflation rate of 3.96% per year for a total of 502.65% between 1971 and 2018. American wages are approximately the same today as they were in 1970 - which means a reduction of 500% purchasing power - so the 2018 dollar is now worth 20 cents' . The 1% have been able to amass billions of these dollars at the expense of the middle class, using cheap (or interest-free) money to acquire immense accumulations of assets.

Q. How to fix the problem?

A. A return to the gold standard seems out of reach at present. What is needed is an effective means of increasing the wealth of the middle class without violating free market principles. Theoretically, a labor shortage should result in higher wages. This is happening already at the lower levels of employment. The average minimum wage has increased approximately 3% in the past year. This is a step in the right direction.

A much more dramatic step has been taken by the companies which have profit-sharing plans, using either cash or (more commonly) stock or options. This is an excellent use of the masses of their own stock which has been re-purchased by many public companies in the past five years, using zero interest funds. Government tax policies can be used to encourage this practice.

Another force for change could be organized Labor, enforcing demands for profit-sharing in addition to wages. This strategy is well established in some industries. Unfortunately, it has not been widespread enough to protect workers as a whole from wage stagnation and asset starvation. In all, however, providing workers with "skin in the game" is by far the best way to protect our precious heritage and secure our children's future.

Q. When?

A. Today! Time is running out. The middle class is restless. Continual erosion of middle America's standard of living is responsible for the election of Donald Trump but also of the recent upswing in support of socialism. Things could get out of control if new hopes cannot be sustained.

© 2019 Richfield Press, LCC. All rights reserved.

If feudalism our future?

Posted on April 3, 2019 at 10:00 PM Comments comments (0)

If we don't close the wealth gap, capitalism will disappear

By Dr. Larry Fedewa (March 30, 2019)



"American capitalism is now in crisis because most financial assets, most ownership of stock, and most capital income from dividends and interest and capital gains are concentrated in the top 1%, 5%, and 10% of the population. As these levels of concentration approach 80%, our society could soon arrive at the level of ownership that English lords and ladies had of all English land before the American Revolution." (Blast and Freeman, FORTUNE, April 17, 2014). That system was essentially medieval feudalism, with serfs and masters.

Henry Ford understood the fundamental dynamic of capitalism, namely, that sharing profits with employees gives them more money with which to buy his products, which in turn increases profits, and that increases everyone's wealth. This simple fact has been forgotten by the American business culture. The very purpose of capitalism is to increase the wealth of the entire nation and so to give everyone a stake in diligently pursuing a peaceful, productive life.

Excessive concentration of wealth defeats this purpose at its foundation by depriving the vast majority of the population of the means to enhance their standard of living. Without this motivation, that population will eventually turn to violence and revolution to regain its hope for a better life.

So, how did this situation come about? There were at least two stimulants: inflation and digitalization. A very convincing analysis of the problem has been supplied by Porter Stansberry, a financial futurist of sorts. He traces the steadily advancing discrepancy between the 1% and the rest of us to inflation. His chart showing the rate of inflation compared to the rate of distribution of wealth from 1971 (the year Nixon took the US off the gold standard) to the present is very illustrative.

His principal thesis is that a sound (i.e. gold-backed) currency forces a wide distribution of buying power, because it reflects the advance or decline of a culture's productivity. For example, a "strong" dollar buys as much for the middle-class workman as it does for a billionaire. But it takes a much higher percentage of "weak" dollars to buy that workman's necessities. The elite buyer has in fact many more dollars to spend even though such purchases are only a small portion of his overall income. His wealth therefore provides him with an ever-higher standard of living, while the workman sinks ever closer to poverty. Since the workman made a major contribution to the production of the item which was then sold for a profit, the capitalist philosophy would dictate that he share in the resulting profits. If he doesn't, he gets angry.

Stansberry sees the violent revolution as having already begun -- citing the recent wave of violence and terrorism. But his solution is very discouraging -- he predicts an "American Jubilee" like those held every 50 years or so in the Bible. In modern terms, that is a collapse of the current economic structure and its replacement by a new normal. He expects a much more catastrophic event than 2007-8. His advice: head for the 50 or so enclaves of the rich and powerful which will be heavily armed. IOW, a new French Revolution.

In his impassioned plea for raising the minimum wage, billionaire Nick Hanauer uses the striking image of the deprived masses picking up their pitchforks to overcome the elite. ("Pitchfork Economics") He too cites the Henry Ford mantra. His solution, however correct, was originally too narrow - the minimum wage is but one factor in a much more complex economy.

An obvious temptation for undercutting the buying power of the middle class has been the digital revolution, which has contributed so monumentally to the productivity increase we have experienced in the past generation. Among its many advances has been the communications revolution, especially the internet, which has enabled workers from developing countries to participate in the US job market. Distances offer no obstacles in today's world. Competition for jobs today has become worldwide. The result has been catastrophic for America's workers.

Corporate chieftains took one look at the wage advantage of foreign workers in Asia and Latin America and fell into their arms. There was no thought of the harm they were doing to their own compatriots, and eventually to themselves, as they gleefully set about the destruction of American capitalism. It has taken one of their own, in the person of Donald J. Trump, to wage a mighty counter-offensive to this movement through his trade and tariff policies. But that also is not enough.

How can we rescue our unique American capitalist system from its current path to feudalism? The key is to institute compensation programs for middle class workers which allow them to share in the prosperity their productivity has helped to create by implementing the labor-saving technologies invented by the elite.

For the answer, we can look to companies which have structured their employee compensation to reflect the employees' contributions to profits. Three such corporations are Southwest Airlines, Federal Express, and Walmart. Each has developed a profit-sharing system which not only reflects the proportionate contributions of ownership, management and labor to the profitability of the total enterprise, but they have also avoided the potential clash between employees and shareholders by issuing part of the workers' bonuses in the form of shares or options. Thus the two groups have overlapping memberships.

A pioneer in this movement was Sam Walton, the founder of Walmart. When he took the company public, he simultaneously provided his employees with highly discounted stock options. The result over time was a company of millionaires, which also became for a time the largest retailer in the world. No matter the current labor relation problems of the company, no one can dispute the legacy of the founder.

The last piece of this puzzle is the Labor movement. The American Labor movement succeeded from the 1930's to the 1960's in winning for its members significant benefits in what might be called "lifestyle" features, such as, worker safety, pensions, health care, and wages. Since the 1970's, however, these benefits have become more or less standard at least in big companies. In other words, Labor won.

Since then Labor seems to have lost not only its way, but also its membership. I suggest that Labor adopt a new cause, "Luxury Benefits": recapturing for its members their rightful share of the immense financial rewards our country has earned. It is no secret that the captains of industry are not going to hand over significant portions of their wealth to their employees without a fight - even if it is in their long-term interest to do so. Someone is going to have to help them "see the light". Nobody is as equipped by history, organization and numbers to undertake this 21st century fight as organized Labor.

(To be continued next week.)

© 2019 Richfield Press, LCC. All rights reserved.

Three Strikes You're Out!

Posted on March 26, 2019 at 2:55 PM Comments comments (0)

By Gary Norris Gray

OAKLAND — Major League Baseball will begin the season in two weeks but it has some major league issues to solve. MLB continues to fight with itself with its lack of promoting the game to young African-Americans. MLB continues promoting its Reviving Baseball in the Inner Cities (RBI) Program with minute results.


One has to ask is this enough to attract young African Americans to the sport which claims to be inclusive but with each passing year, it seems to be a sport of exclusion. The RBI program has not lived up to its promise 27 years ago to recruit young Black players. Maybe, just maybe it is time for the Negro Leagues to return to give African Americans that experience of this wonderful game.


The current influx of Latin and Asian players seems to be at the expense of the African-American players, owners continue to try to keep money in their pocketbooks with lower contracts.


This year’s contract disputes are a classic example of how MLB ownership continues to move backward with the appearance of collusion, eliminating the players they don’t like. Just another black eye for baseball. Baseball fans do not want to spend money watching class double “A” players on the field.


A work stoppage cannot be far behind.


Currently, there are over twenty baseball programs overseas in Latin-America, the Caribbean Islands, and on the Asian continent, while the (RBI) inner-city baseball programs in the United States pale in comparison with providing similar opportunities or incentives for African-American youth through said programs.


These programs have ignored RBI fields resulting in their deterioration. Young Black males have a difficult time playing in their respective city so they lose interest in baseball.


MLB-needs to attract Black youngsters from the age of eight because you have to start early to learn basic baseball skills, just as you have basketball and football talent at an early age, this is not being done and the sport of baseball will continue to suffer.


There are other issues such as colleges and universities offering limited numbers of scholarships and with the lack of minority mentors, i.e. Black coaches.


Historically Black Colleges and Universities are also having a difficult time staffing these teams. Currently, there are 83 African-American players on the MLB fields in 2019. There are 30 teams with 27 players on each team, add that up.


There are only 8 % of all players, a drop from 11.2 %. In the 1970s, Black players made up as much of 27% of MLB players. The 1971 World Champion Pittsburgh Pirates fielded a Black team in the National League Playoffs and World Series with the assistance of Black Latin players in that era. This will never happen again.

Baseball was America’s pastime with everybody included players such as Willie Mays, Jackie Robinson, Hank Aaron, Ernie Banks, and Roy Campanella from the Negro Leagues. It is currently failing by not reaching out to the African American community.




At the All-Star Game in 2014, the sport did not even mention the last player to flirt with a .400 batting average, a player that remained with one team, one organization his whole career, a player that loved to teach everybody about the game.

For African Americans who love this game, it was the 3rd strike, the last strike, a final blow. MLB does not care about African-Americans and it shows. This was the explanation of the omission of Gwynn by Ken Rosenthal of Fox Sports Network:


“We are deeply saddened by the loss of Hall of Famer Tony Gwynn, an extraordinary individual whose memory we have honored in numerous ways in recent weeks. The Baseball family has sadly lost a number of people this year – including Hall of Famer Ralph Kiner, Frank Cashen, and former All-Stars Jerry Coleman, Jim Fregosi, and Don Zimmer – and did not want to slight anyone by singling out one individual.”


Baseball could have taken a moment of silence to honor ALL of these players, with a mention of their names and photos on the jumbotron. Just another example of the stumbling and bumbling with MLB executives.




The first strike happened some fifty years ago as the Saint Louis Cardinal outfielder Curt Flood challenged baseball’s reserve clause-free agency laws and won. Flood got traded from the back to back National League Champion Saint Louis Cardinals to the last place Philadelphia Phillies. It was the last Championship before they divided the leagues into the Eastern and Western Divisions.


Flood did not want to play for the Phillies because of the lingering reputation of the racist fan base in South Philadelphia and he did not want to play in that old dilapidated Connie Mack Stadium either.


The Phillies would move to the new round cookie cutter monster Veterans Stadium next year. Flood never played for the Phillies as he was traded to the Washington Senators who moved to Arlington, Texas.

Mr. Flood stated that (we) players are not cattle to be shuttled off to any city that owners wished without that player’s consent. Curt Flood’s political, social, and economic protest created the modern day athlete and he still does not receive the praises for the sacrifices he made.


Every player playing today should give thanks to Curt Flood for their lucrative contracts.


Mr. Curt Flood should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame; but because of his legal battle and victory, the entrance has been denied to the All-Star outfielder. Young African Americans have taken notice.


The St. Louis Cardinal organization added insult to injury when they hosted the All-Star Game in 2009 with all of the living and former Cardinals players being honored before the game. Curt Flood was not mentioned.


Then the second strike, the denial of one of baseball’s living legions into the Hall of Fame. Mr. Buck O’Neil-Mr. Baseball who played in the Negro Leagues with the Kansas City Monarchs and MLB’s Chicago Cubs. The Hall of Fame waited until O’Neil passed away before recognizing him as the ambassador to baseball. A living O’Neil would have been a goldmine for the sport and a spokesman to gain the confidence of young African American fans but they booted the ball again. “E-5” Error.




Baseball has struck out in the Black communities. Young African-Americans are watching. Young Blacks want no part of MLB’s hypocrisy. Just ask this year’s Oklahoma quarterback Kyler Murray he opted for the National Football League instead of baseball. How about quarterbacks Russell Wilson of the Seattle Seahawks and Patrick Mahomes of the Kansas City Chiefs both had baseball skills and both choose the National Football League. There is a reason for that….


The blackballing and distancing themselves from the current home run king and All-Star outfielder Barry Lamar Bonds added insult to injury after the Sammy Sosa-Mark McGwire Baseball Love Feast in 1998. This action cemented the growing negative feelings by young Black followers of the game. They see the harsh treatment of Black players on the field.


They see the current glorification of Philadelphia’s Bryce Harper and L.A.’s Mike Trout and the industries ignoring the fetes of Black star Philadelphia’s Andrew McCutchen.


Black kids don’t see players that look like them on the field. We could be witnessing the last Black All-Star pitcher in New York with Yankee CC. Sabathia. CC will retire at the end of the 2019 season. Can you name another Black All Star pitcher?


These young Black fans see Ken Caminiti, Mark McGwire, Andy Pettitte, Rafael Palmeiro, Roger Clemons, Ryan Braun, the list is endless never receive the same punishment as African American players for the same crime.


This sport continues to promote star players of “A Whiter Shade of Pale,” Los Angeles Angels outfielder Mike Trout and The Philadelphia Phillie outfielder Bryce Harper, baseball’s wonderkins. These two players are the current vision of baseball today.


What happened to African-American players like outfielder Matt Kemp of the Cincinnati Reds, outfielder Coco Crisp of the Cleveland Indians, Philadelphia Phillie outfielder Andrew McCutchen, pitchers C.C. Sabathia of the New York Yankees or David Price of the Boston Red Sox, or Miami Marlins outfielder Curtis Granderson. What about young guns outfielders Jackie Bradley Jr. and Mookie Betts of the Boston Red Sox? These outstanding Black players will never be the face of baseball.


Major League Baseball continues to stumble and bumble its way each year with the African- American communities. This year only one Black manager will sign the lineup card out of 30 teams.


Retired manager Dusty Baker of the Washington Nationals, Chicago Cubs, San Francisco Giants and the Cincinnati Reds guided all four teams into the playoffs. How many managers have done that?


Cito Gaston, the manager of the Toronto Blue Jays, won back to back World Series Championships, How many managers have done that?


Currently, manager Dave Roberts of the Los Angeles Dodgers took the team to the World Series in back to back years and still does not get the respect of winning managers. How many rookie managers their first two years guided their team to back to back playoffs?


Last year was the first World Series that had two minority managers leading their teams to victory. Alex Cora led the Boston Red Sox over the Los Angeles Dodgers. Cora is Latino.


Black managers have produced champions wherever they have gone It will not continue to happen if MLB continues with this racial attitude but THAT’S BASEBALL BEING BASEBALL


Progress is slowly being made with a new chance for young African-Americans. In 2014 the Cincinnati Reds opened the first Urban Youth Academy baseball training facility that is designed to develop baseball fundamentals and skills. Other teams need to follow in the Reds footsteps.


Brooklyn Dodgers Jackie Robinson would repeat the statement that MLB has to try harder to reach out to our African-American youth so they too can enjoy the game America calls its pastime.


For many African-American baseball fans, it might be too late.




Maybe it is time to see the Kansas City Monarchs, New York Black Yankees, Birmingham Black Barons, Atlanta Black Crackers, Toledo Crawfords, Indianapolis Clowns, Newark Eagles, and the Homestead Grays return to the baseball diamonds of America.


Gary Norris Gray – Writer, Author, Historian. Gibbs Magazine-Oakland, California and New England Informer- Boston Mass. THE GRAYLINE: – The Analects of A Black Disabled Man, The Gray Leopard Cove, The Batchelor Pad Network on Disabled Community Activist. Email at [email protected]

[email protected]

©Copyrighted Gary Norris Gray @ Gray Leopard Prod


Posted on February 2, 2019 at 11:15 AM Comments comments (0)



Gary Norris Gray-BASN-Staff Reporter


OAKLAND, CA.- As we turn the calendar to 2019 the fight to ban the R-Word continues and travels to Bucks County, Pennsylvania. The Neshaminy School District has been sued by the state Human Relation Commission for the use of the R-word. Hearings are currently being held for their athletic teams using the Redskin name.


Attorney Lisa Knight of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission argued before a commission hearing officer that the Bucks County district wouldn’t use a nickname based on any other racial group, so it shouldn’t use a term that many indigenous people find offensive.


As each year passes more high schools are dropping this name and mascot. In Michigan Belding High became the Black Knights, In Houston Lamar High became the Texans and in Wilmington the Conrad Schools of Science became the Red Wolves. Schools all over the country are throwing in the towel rather then make a public stink about their nickname and mascot, not Neshaminy High School.


The high school has instead dug in its heels and refuses to move on this issue. Annemarie Remy a Native American from the Lenni-Lenape tribe and the grand-daughter of Bill Thompson-Chief Whippoorwill has tried to educate the community. Stating that we will try to make the people of Bucks County understand the error of their ways, it has not worked.


In 2013 another Native American resident Donna Fann-Boyle filed a complaint on the behalf of her son at Neshaminy High. The Boyle family dropped the case after they were harassed by the local residents of Bucks County,


The fight is entering its 40th year and the Alumni want to hold on to the past just as the Washington Football Club, The Chicago Blackhawks, The Kansas City Chiefs, The Atlanta Braves, and Cleveland Indians want to hold on to their name and mascot. “It’s part of a proud tradition,” A tradition that needs to fade into the past. Slavery was part of American tradition, you don’t hear people wanting to bring back this tradition even thou some say Mr. Trump would not object


“The R-word is meant as an honor.” Guess the people of north east Pennsylvania have not read or understood the definition.


The meaning comes from the bounties offered for the killings of Native Americans by presenting the bloody scalp or skin, thus calling it red skin. This is not flattering. The Author of “the Wizard of Oz,” L. Frank Baum pleaded for the annihilation of the remaining Native Americans in 1890. This is the same attitude in 2019 concerning the mascot and name of teams across this nation with the R-word.


Keeping the name desensitizes a racial slur and even promotes acceptance. This is the fight that most politically active Native Americans engage in every day across this nation.


Progress is being made in 2015 the State of California banned the name from high schools and in 1989 there were 93 schools in our nation using this name. In 2019 it has dropped to 49 in 20 states.

The Pennsylvania Human Relation Commission will continue to have hearings on the Neshaminy High’s nickname and the defenders will keep up the fight to keep the R-word.


As Spike Lee states “Do The Right Thing.” Neshaminy High administrators change the mascot and name be on the right side of history.


I hope we don’t repeat those errors by censoring pro-Redskins voices. Whether the school retains its nickname or not, everyone in the community should remain free to use the term (or not) as they see fit. Any new restriction will make the defenders of the nickname into martyrs. And it will reinforce the narrative of political correctness in which finger-wagging liberals impose their linguistic preferences on everyone else. This reporter still does not get it, that you cannot disrespect another’s culture.


The school newspaper tried to be correct and got punished for it. The school officials required the paper to use the R-word on their editorial page. The student refused and the faculty adviser was suspended for two days without pay. This was sending a message to the students restricting free speech.


Last if you are going to use a Native American name and logo please use it correct.


Under cross-examination by Knight and questioning by the hearing examiner, Carl Summerson, Billeaudeaux conceded that the Neshaminy logo is historically inaccurate because it depicts a Plains Indian and not one from the Lenni- Lenape tribe that once dominated the area that is now lower Bucks County.


The Neshaminy High R-word defenders have to look at themselves in the mirror and ask are we really racists?


Time will tell.

Gary Norris Gray – Writer, Author, Historian, Gibbs Magazine-Oakland, California and New England Informer- Boston, Mass. THE GRAYLINE:- The Analects of A Black Disabled Man, The Gray Leopard Cove, Soul Tree Radio In The Raw, and The Batchelor Pad Network, Disabled Community Activist. Email [email protected]


©Copyrighted Gary Norris Gray @ Gray Leopard Prod