ANDREW MWENDA; LISTEN YOUR "LISTENER" IS SPEAKING.

Part 2 

A

ndrew Mwenda makes another claim in his article and I quote; “ According to Michelle Alexander’s book; The New Jim Crow, there are double the number of blacks in jail than in college” published in 2010.  The book written by a civil rights litigator and legal scholar has been highly applauded and criticized  in equal measure. In the  words of Kirkus Reviews, the book is; “An explosive debut… alarming, provocative and convincing.” On the other hand according to A. Johnson in his post to  libcom.org, scholars and social justice activists say the book promotes false understanding of mass incarceration and have called for review . So perhaps Kirkus was right to call it alarming.

The claim that there are “more blacks in jail than in college” is a huge myth and am not the only one who says so. Ivory A. Toldson a Howard University professor and Congressional Black Cacus Foundational analyst was quoted to say that  “the myth that there are more Black men in Prison than in college is  the most frequently quoted statistic about Black men in the United States.” Even President Barack Obama has fallen prey to this myth, he has been quoted to say that “we have more work to do when more young black men languish in prison than attend colleges and universities across America” in 2007 during the NAACP forum.

The myth has been traced down to 2002 report from the Justice Institute titled “Cell or Classroom; The Funding of Higher Education and Corrections and an impact on African-American men” which report according to the website newamericamedia.org was ill researched, a notion I identify with and there are facts and statistics to support this argument and  prove the myth is only but a myth .

 According to the U.S Census of 2013 there are 18.5 million  black males in the U.S. In the same year the National Center for Educational statistics found that 1,437,363 black males were enrolled in college. In the same year there a total of  745,000 black males behind bars combining local and federal prisons according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics National Prisoner Statistics program.  So when you work out the numbers there are more 692,363 black males in colleges than there in prison.  In fact the number of black males enrolling to college has been on the increase and statistics reveal that enrollment of black males in colleges rose from 693,044 in 2001 to 1,437,363 in 2013. An increment by 51.7% in only 12 years.  It’s clear for all to see that the myth that there are more blacks in jail than in college is only but a myth and many have relied on it either innocently or ignorantly.

Andrew Mwenda is not alone, many have  fallen prey to this myth, writers, policymakers, and civil rights organizations have often times used it with the best intentions at heart, yet this repeated falsehood has proven detrimental to the black communities. So not only is the assertion none factual but  it casts a negative picture of black male academic achievements and feeds into the stereotype that black males are predisposed to crime and violence as highlighted by  the New America Media news letter of 11^th August 2015.

3. Andrew Mwenda makes another claim that there are more black people in Jail today than were enslaved in 1850, and as such more blacks are disenfranchised toady than 1875, when the 15^th amendment prohibiting discrimination in voting rights based on race was passed. He borrows this from the book The New Jim Crow that I sited above and borrows many arguments from his previous articles that include “The age of Human Imperialism” posted on his personal website on 6^th July www.independent.co.ug/andrewmwenda. Even John Legend, the popular secular artist commonly known for his hit song “All of me,” has been quoted to say the same.

Now I have real issues with this assertion because it lacks both analysis and is drawn completely out of context. I will prove to you that not only is the assertion completely drawn out of proportion but that it also lacks the analysis that befits the modern reader.

Whereas the fact that the Black incarceration today in the U.S is larger than that of the slave population in 1850 in numbers is a shocking comparison, its only because its viewed by many out of context.  The population of Blacks in America today is much higher than that of Blacks in America in 1850, so then the debate shifts from mere numbers to percentages. An accurate and a more convincing comparison can only be drawn when we look at the black percentage in prison today as compared to the black population in the U.S today vis-à-vis   the percentage of blacks in slavery in 1850 as compared to the total black population in the U.S in 1850. Thinking otherwise would be to deny yourself the actual benefit of critical analysis rather than mere plain arguments.

 According to the 1850 Population Census in the U.S, there were 3.6 million African Americans that included approximately 3.2 million slaves. However there were 872,924 Male African American slaves above the age of 15 excluding minors and women. This means that 90% of the black population was in slavery, 9 in 10 blacks were in slavery.

In contrast, in 2013 the US Census Bureau estimated 45 million African Americans that constitute approximately 14.1% of the total population of 316.1 million. This is 12 times more than the African American population in 1850.

A lot of reports seem to agree with the findings of  Politifact, an online news website that there are about  1.7 million black men under some form of correctional control, including probation and parole, excluding those held in local jails on any given day. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Prisoner Statistics Program report of mid 2013 there about 745,000 black men in US prison and jail system. But if we were to take the 1.7 million that most people and this case Andrew  Mwenda choose to identify with, that’s about twice the 870,000 or so black men at least 15 years in slavery in 1850.  This has been the rallying cry of most policy makers, civil rights organizations and writers like Mwenda  himself. But this is a purely misleading comparison and this is why.

Given that there are 45 million Black Americans 1.7 million only represents 3.8% of the entire black population of the U.S. So what’s more alarming? The 90% African Americans in slavery in 1850 or the  3.8% in incarceration today. The analysis is there for all to see. Therefore in no way can we make an assertion that there are “more” African Americans in incarceration today than there were in slavery over 160 years ago.

Finally, my arguments have not only been fertile with facts, but also with timely analysis that befits the modern reader. I have shifted the debate from the usual rhetoric and dogma and presented an new angel to the argument. So it’s only reasonable to note that for every story there are always two sides. I have often heard of a Ugandan proverb that says; “You cannot condemn Nyakato before you hear out Nyagoma”.  

Grounding oneself to one line of argumentation is not only counterproductive but also intellectual suicido, because with new facts comes new perspectives hence fresh perceptions. This has been my side to the argument

The writer

Mwesigwa Onesmus

Third Year law Student

Uganda Christian University

A blogger, social and Political analyst and ardent debater

 ANDREW MWENDA  LISTEN YOUR “LISTENER” IS SPEAKING

Part 1

 

R

obin Morgan says "Knowledge is power. Information is power. The secreting and manipulation of knowledge or information may be an act of tyranny camouflaged as humility.”.This is why I was very disturbed by Andrew Mwenda’s article titled “Obama should mind his own business”, an article published by Aljezera that followed right after Obama’s speech to the African Union in Addis Ababa. What disturbed me the most was the ill informed applause he received from what I would call right thinking members of society and a considerable section of  the elite class. It revealed to me  two things that the so called elite Ugandan class is poor at both research and analysis. 

It’s important to note that Barack Obama is the first American President to host over 49 African Presidents and prime ministers from Africa for the First African leaders summit, the first American President to address the AU not forgetting that he is the first Black American President.

In his 48 minute speech to the AU,  Obama made 5 rather important points. One,  his acknowledgement that he is a proud son of Africa. Second that the approach towards Africa must change, in that, Africa no longer needs patrons but rather partners, that Africa no longer needs aid but rather trade.  Thirdly, that the most important task for our African leaders is to provide opportunities for the emerging youth population. Fourth, that Africa no longer needs strong leaders per se but rather strong institutions and finally his admission that America is no perfect democracy.

I must state that I have my reservations on Obama as a president and a heavy critic of his foreign policies but in respect to his address to the AU I must confess that the US President got the most part of his speech right, the countless applause's  in the house could not suggest otherwise, Regardless of these insightful pointers amidst many others Mwenda attempted to critic this submission. On an ordinary day at office I would gladly enjoy a well thought out criticism of Obama’s  speech, but rather Mwenda chose to shy away from the contents of the speech itself especially the key points as I highlighted above and took a road traveled by most  intellectual psuedos,.

I must confess that I was a huge fan of  his line of arguments and at times almost persuaded that he always almost wrote my mind but today I cannot say the same and am not alone. Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba, founder of  Ugandans at Heart (UAH), the biggest critical social media platform in Uganda says “I was once a strong Andrew Mwenda  fan and I think, deep inside I still have a soft spot for him, but he just keeps breaking my heart man.”

Sarah Nalukenge a social and political commentator refers to Andrew Mwenda as an “agent provocateur who disguises as an ardent critic so as to attract, trap and compromise dissenters”.  A one Yahya Sseremba even wrote an article titled: “ THE FALL OF ANDREW MWENDA: How bribery turned a reverend journalist into a vulgar propagandist, published by the campus Journal April 18 2012 a must read for anyone having second thoughts already.

The website www.ipetitions.com  has petitioned NTV to remove Andrew Mwenda from the controversial  NTV News Night political talk show,  and I quote their statement  “There is no doubt, Andrew Mwenda is an intelligent, cunning, and highly educated fellow who does lots of research. However, using his wide knowledge to twist facts and intimidate/bully many of those who pay attention to him is not proper conduct.” The site has got 1276 signatures within one week a true manifestation of a frustrated viewer audience.

Thanks to the few like minded individuals who were equally disturbed by Andrew Mwenda’s  psuedo  intellectualism I got the motivation to voice my opinion about the same. So am not the only one who thinks Andrew Mwenda has lost his credibility as a writer.

On reading Andrew Mwenda’s article in response to Obama’s speech to the AU, it would appear so typical of Mwenda that one would not even consider the option of listening in on Obama’s speech or let alone analyze the truth behind Mwenda’s  article as many   have been drawn to believe Mwenda’s word is alpha and omega. But on the contrary his article was marred with both ignorance, misinformed submissions and outdated research which I will prove.  

1.      Mwenda accused Obama of not having the moral authority to lecture Africans on Human rights  a position I also share and have actually written an article about the same however the base of his claim is what hit me hard. Mwenda based his assertion on evidence that the USA police kills a black American every 28 hour which he quoted from a  report made in “2012” called operation Ghetto Storm. But this does not in any way make America less credible because of targeting blacks as Mwenda portrayed or at least wanted us to believe . The figure comes from this unofficial partisan report by a black nationalist organization, the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement. The group claims 313 black people were killed in 2012 by “someone employed or protected by the US government”, thus it was not the US police force alone covered by the report but also included members of private security agencies ,government employees, shop workers, and members of the public. The most current research published by Joshua D Copelandon 22 August 2014 on his website www.thereelnetwork.net  reveals that its one black per every 36 hours not 28 hours as Mwenda had posed,  if updated information is anything to go by.

      The website www.libertynews.com in 2012, revealed that according to the CDC, 140 blacks were killed by police. That same year 386 whites were killed by police. Over the 13-year period from 1999 to 2011, the CDC reports that 2,151 whites were killed by cops and 1,130 blacks were killed by cops. More recent reports from the   Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, CDC and the FBI Census Bureau reveal that   in 2012, police killed 123 blacks , and 326 whites . In the following year 2013, blacks committed 5,375 murders while whites committed 4,396 murders

      So from the statistics it’s clear that not only have more whites been killed than blacks but also that more blacks have committed murder crimes contrary to what Mwenda’s article wanted to have us to believe that the American police deliberately victimizes blacks.  But since black people make up about 13 per cent of the US population, and nearly 63 percent of Americans are white, one would be seen to conclude that there were more than three black deaths at police hands per million people compared to about one in a million for  whites if you divide the deaths by the average population. But even if this was so, it does not correspond with murder arrests made, if it was a question of averages per population then more whites would also be arrested for murder. Further statistics from the Bureau of Statistics on homicides from 1980-2008 reveals that about 93% of blacks in America are killed by other fellow blacks. Thus the Black-on-black violence claims more lives than police killings..  Furthermore  the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, CDC and the FBI Census Bureau reveals that Police killings of blacks has been cracked  down by 70 percent in last 50 years.

     

      So where does Andrew Mwenda, a resounding journalist get the audacity to use black American killings by US police to justify his assertions? Its only reasonable to conclude that this was marred with both ignorance, misinformed submissions and outdated research which was spun to support a weak argument aimed at appealing to the Hearts of most Africans and support whoever’s interests.

Note; I will release my article in parts as there is a lot to be put right with Mwenda's Articles. Keep viewing my blog for the latest updates on the same

The writer

Mwesigwa Onesmus

Third Year law Student

Uganda Christian University

A blogger, social and Political analyst and ardent debater

AMERICA HAS NO MORAL RIGHT TO LECTURE THE REST OF THE WORLD ON HUMAN RIGHTS

United States of America On 4^th July 1776 gained its independence from the British. On that day a declaration of independence was signed by 12 states and later the state of  New York on 19^th  July. The declaration of independence contained among many arguably the most memorable declaration in the history of the  human rights agenda and I quote, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are edwoed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are life, Liberty and pursuit of happiness”.  For many, America is a perfect example of a state that has championed the human rights agenda both in practice and advocacy. Hence a belief that America has earned the moral right to spearhead the human rights agenda. An argument that is in my opinion is unfounded, and marred with hypocrisy, misguided and egocentric traits. If there is any country in the world today that should “lecture”  the rest about human rights, that country is not to be  America. It has no moral right to do so.  

Even after independence and the signing of the declaration of  Independence  USA changed nothing about racial segregation, women’s rights and recognition of the black race. In particular the question of equality, the notion that all are created equal. Until 1967, marriage between different races was prohibited by law, supported by  anti-miscegenation laws, or miscegenation laws, which laws enforced segregation. They prohibited  marriage and intimate relationships between different race and  criminalized interracial marriages. These laws had been introduced in 17^th century and remained in force even after independence. These were  later reinforced by the Racial Integrity Act of 1924, which prohibited marriage between people classified as "white" and people classified as "colored”. It was not until   1967, in the supreme court case of  Loving v. Virginia, that anti-miscegenation laws were held to be unconstitutional. This was exactly 191 years after independence, approximately 2 centuries after the signing of the declaration of independence.

Blacks in America were denied the right to vote even after the signing of the declaration of independence,  it was not until 1869 that an effort was made by congress where congress banned restrictions on the basis of race and color when it came to voting rights, an amendment that was adopted on March 30, 1870. Note that this was 94 years after the declaration of independence. However these amendments were never effected as states incorporated laws that acted as obstacles for the realization of this right, that included poll taxes and discriminatory literacy tests from which whites were exempted from what they termed as “grandfather clauses”. These laws effectively disenfranchised the black people in America. So in reality blacks in America were not accorded the right to vote. After close to two centuries in 1965, “The Voting Rights Act, was signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson on August 6, 1965, that overcame legal barriers at the state and local levels that prevented African Americans from exercising their right to vote under the 15th Amendment (1870) to the Constitution of the United States”. This was the actual amiable move that empowered blacks to vote in America. It took America 189 years to grant black people a right to vote that had been protected by the declaration of human rights signed approximately two centuries ago.

 Women in America were never accorded same rights with men, when it came to voting even after the declaration of independence  .  Attempts by women movements to participate in the 1872  elections with the hope that the Supreme court would enforce their “unalienable Rights” hit a dead end when the “Supreme Court” ruled against the suffragists. In 1890 a  the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) was formed to further the fight for women’s voting rights. In 1916 Alice Paul started the National Woman's Party (NWP), a militant pressure group with the mission of having the passage of a national suffrage amendment. It had over 200 of its supports arrested with many others going on hunger strike. “After a hard-fought series of votes in the U.S. Congress and in state legislatures, the Nineteenth Amendment became part of the U.S. Constitution on August 20, 1920 which in effect accorded women the right to vote.  It states that; "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

 That was exactly  144 years after the declaration of independence that stated “ that all men are created equal”.

So why should America not learn from its own history and let countries go through the metamorphosis of the realization of human rights. If it took America close to two centuries to provide for what I would call basic rights as argued above, America should give the world breathing space, allow countries to develop internal desires for change of laws, give chance to nations to debate their futures and draw compromises based on their own considerations.

The whole notion of “America is Angelic ” is unfounded, unqualified and marred with hypocrisy, and misguided by egocentric traits. Nations should be left to craft their destinies and not to be compelled to copy a paste from a “world leader with dirty hands”.

Article Written by

Mweisgwa Onesmus

 

THE CHRISTIAN IDENTITY.

A lesson the Uganda can learn from UCU

U

ganda Christian University prides in maintaining a Christian Identity. Founded on the principles of the Church and with Christian values at the heart of its operations, the University has gone a notch higher in an attempt to maintain this identity by introducing a Christian element in its education curriculum and also in the way institution is run as a whole. 

 However this has not gone without criticism, given the University’s history as a theological college, many argue that after being made a university in 1997, perhaps that transition would include an identity that reflects a sort of new transformation or rather the start of a new page, but rather the theological college now turned into  a University maintained its former identity. This came with mixed reactions with a considerable majority or rather minority depending on how you choose to see it regarding UCU as a predominant conservative Christian University. A view that has left an impression within the minds of potential would be entrants into the Campus ponder widely about the option!

The facts on the ground however depict the direct opposite, as the perception is a misconception.  The university has in a unique way embraced the diversity that comes with the inflow of students from various backgrounds, tribes, religions, nationality and culture. There is no doubt as to the harmony enjoyed within the confines of the institution, a true reflection of an integrated community while in a unique way maintaining the Christian identity.

The central key in the debate is as to whether its stands to be logical for the University to maintain a Christian identity given this diversity.

My line of argument would lie best in support of maintaining the Christian identity, and this is not because I subscribe to the Christian faith but rather because am a great believer in remaining true to the principles and founding instruments of the University. The University of Cambridge prides in having maintained its traditions that traces back to 1209. Most critics have gone ahead to call it the traditional  school of Europe yet it stands to be among the most reputable Universities in the world. The state of Israel regardless of a history of turmoil has thrived because of the entrenched commitment to maintain the Jewish identity, its military and political strength is a pillar in the middle East, a force any world leader has to reckon with.  Its contribution to world politics and the world’s history in general would be immaterial had the Jewish identity been neglected or discarded.

The infamous Hitler of Germany opened war against the world because at the time he was convinced that the German identity was being threaten, the German economy was predominantly run by Jews at the time and given the outcomes of World war one that had left Germany reduced to ashes, Hitler rallied the entire world to revive the German pride. Regardless of the fateful outcomes, Germany as a state has fought hard to maintain the German pride, and as a result, Germany has gained its position in the world as the biggest economy in Europe and the epicenter center of European politics. This has all been made possible because of the energies the Germans invest in rubber stamping their identity; the German pride.

So the question of identity is at the heart of any serious institution, government  and state for that matter, it becomes an under laying ideology, a unifying factor for a common cause. Regardless of this fact however, a tolerant environment should be at play that accommodates a diversity of ideas, and cultures and one that seeks to harmonize the differences and direct them to a common cause. The desire to maintain an identity should nonetheless not threaten the existence of divergent ideologies, beliefs and convictions. A balance has to be struck.

It’s in this spirit that I quote Hattiloo Theatre, in these words that;

“All individuals must feel free to explore the uniqueness of their culture and identity while developing understandings of the cultural diversity that exists in the world around them. Denying cultural expression means limiting the expression of unique perspectives on life and the transmission of knowledge from generation to generation”.

UCU has done a tremendous job of maintaining its Christian identity and remaining true to its founding principle at the same time providing an enabling ground for integration, cultural tolerance and harmonization. Therefore UCU poses to be the perfect example of a fully integrated society with an identity jealously guarded yet at the same time embracing diversity. Uganda as a state would learn a lot from this perfect example because diversity is a blessing and never a curse and  what unites us is greater than what divides us.

For God and my country

For the love of UCU.

[The article; The Christian Identity is written by Mwesigwa Onesmus a student of Law at Uganda Christian University, an ardent debater and a social and political analyst. 

WHY CELEBRATE 9TH JUNE

9th June is a date that holds significane to people in different ways, perhaps to the vast majority, its an ordinary day, one that comes and goes.

To ugandan's however, its a reminder that the peace we have as of today, has not been out of sheer bare existence but rather something that has been built from the sweat and toils of hundreds of Ugandans. Some sacrificing their lives!

But lets go beyond the ordinary talk and lets get into the big talk. Why is the celebration of such an event in the first place. Is it a mare rembrance of the the events that led to the peaceful Uganda we see to day, is it to celebrate the realisation of the dreams goals and aspirations faught for by the war lords or it a combination of the two.

Your guess is as good as mine, its a combination of both, but what we see in Uganda is the celebration of the former.

Extracts from the book: Great Debators
The never Unending Story


So the multi million dollar question this book seeks to answer is; What makes a great debator?

My experience in debate  has taught me alot about public speech than I ever imagined, my mind and whole being was opened up to a whole new life of experiences and life changing moments.

For some time I could not clearly comprehend how I was able to be the best debator in the country, go on to represent Uganda on and International stage and lead my team to the knockout round.

This book is meant to give you extracts from my own personal exprerience and the experience of many others, some of whom I still refer to as my mentors.

Debate is an art, infact I look at it more like acting, every single move an actor or actress does must be off script. Debate much as acting is something that is designed to be performed and performed well.

One US president is said to have occasionally rehearsed his speech about 50 time before his wife before he could go on television. Practice makes practice, a common saying we are most likely familiar with. But if no one is, and no one can be perfect, then why practice? Nice question.  Perfection is a ideal to which we work so hard to emulate or better yet reach. So much as its humanly impossible to be perfect, its humanly possible to be within its reach.

This book is designed to make you the best debater there ever can be.


A speech has three segments, the intoduction, the body and the conclusion. A debeate speech equally followss the same formate. It is said that people will always most likely remember your opening and closing far more than the actual content itself.
 This brings me to how the best debaters nail it from the word go. Great debaters always lookup to the unexpected, have you noticed that if a person says exactly or close to what you imagined he would say, your interest in his speech is significantly reduced? And have you noticed that some one who gets you off guard with his opening speech usually you are kept  interested. I remember I my high school, every-time our head teacher stoop up to talk, about half of the school or even more  rhymed  with him in his opening words because they had become routine and easily predictable.

Great debaters have mastered the art of nailing it from the word go.

Great debators know how to get the audience to the edge of their seats by kicking off either with a quote, proverb,  a saying, a peice of statistics, or even a pause. I will talk breifely about the above.

Quotes, sayings and proverbs. Its possible to use a quote, saying or proverb and still loss credibility, a poorly selected quote with an honest intention to impress may not just kill the credibility your speech but also his your general impression.



to be continued........................................