 |
Read more of Kim Lawton's August 8, 2005 interview with civil rights activist and radio talk-show host Joe Madison about black church activism and Darfur:
You've been a key activist in the whole Sudan campaign for going on a decade, at least. What pulled you into this issue initially?
It was actually a news program that I saw on Sudan and Mauritania -- [that] now seems almost a decade ago -- about modern-day slavery that was connected to the 20-year-old Sudanese civil war. I was just amazed that this type of slavery existed, and I began researching, learning more about it, participating with different organizations, actually having them come on my talk show, which was a way for me to learn while my audience was learning at the same time. Then what I did was have an opportunity to go to southern Sudan. It was in the middle of the war zone. It was a very dangerous trip, and I was told that it was dangerous. I was told that we would have to go under cover, that the government of Khartoum could not know that I was there, and see for myself actual slaves that had been retrieved from northern Sudan and brought back to their villages in southern Sudan.
It floored me. It was hard to believe that it was real. Then I came back, and I began getting civil rights organizations that I've had a long relationship with, tried to get them involved, tried to get churches involved. We raised thousands of dollars to retrieve women and children who had been taken [as] slaves and sent the money back to southern Sudan, in essence to buy their freedom. I didn't realize how controversial that was. It seemed like the natural thing to do. Several of my Muslim friends were quite upset with me. They basically said I was being duped, I didn't really know what I was doing, that there was no slavery. But I saw it firsthand. I saw it with my own eyes. I talked to literally hundreds of individuals who not only had been captured and then sold into slavery, but I talked to their relatives, I talked to their husbands, I talked to their mothers and their grandmothers.
I saw it firsthand, and then I felt a need to come back and activate the African-American community. There was this lack of knowledge. They weren't aware that it was going on. Often when we think of slavery, we think of the American-European system and African system of slavery -- the Golden Triangle. This is entirely different. This was a product of war -- villages being raided, men being killed, children and women being captured and then sold into slavery and used for any purpose that their purchasers saw fit.
Do you think there was a particular connection for you because you have been so involved in civil rights? Was there a special resonance for you when you were seeing all this happening?
It was a connection that, as I go back now all those years, I said to a meeting of members of Congress from both parties, it really shook me to my bone marrow when I saw four or five hundred women and children who had walked literally hundreds of miles from the northern part of Sudan to the southern part of Sudan, where we had to meet them clandestinely and then allow them to go back to their villages and their families. To see them lined up, being processed, I mean, I literally broke down in tears in the middle of this barren area, under a mahogany tree. As I said to somebody, it was surreal. That was the best way to describe it. It was like something out of ROOTS. It was unbelievable, and at first I didn't want to believe it. That's why I kept prodding and prodding for the truth: "Is what I'm seeing real?" It didn't so much have anything to do with civil rights as much as it had to do with human rights. As an African American, seeing these Africans in this condition, [there] was just no way I was going to allow this to happen and not use whatever resources I had to change it.
It was a matter of coming back and then engaging all my associates in the civil rights community. I was on the board of NAACP at the time. Whenever I would go to meetings or conferences: "Do you know what's going on?" Most people honestly didn't. It wasn't a matter of indifference; it was just a matter of awareness. I just used what currency I had with these individuals that I had developed down through the years, and there it was an educational process of informing them, educating them, inviting them to go with me. I made two trips to Sudan myself, one with Reverend Walter Fauntroy, and [I] arranged for even Reverend Al Sharpton to go. The more people who saw it, the more people who understood it, I thought, the quicker we could get action.
That's how this all began. Now that was involving slavery and the civil war. I think the involvement of the Left and the Right put the Khartoum government in a position where they could not play one against the other. They had nowhere to go politically. The religious Right, the evangelicals, had been very active in the whole issue of the civil war and slavery. Many of them had missions and hospitals. The difficult part was getting the African-American ministers, who were very liberal and politically involved, to trust the right-wing conservative evangelicals. My attitude and position was, when I was in Sudan people did not ask you if you were a Republican or a Democrat. They didn't ask if you were a liberal or a conservative. They asked for help. And these are people who didn't know who Joe Madison was. They didn't know who Al Sharpton was. They didn't know who Reverend Graham was. They were looking for help. I think that coalition being formed led to the war being ended. I think that helped to create an atmosphere that brought both sides to the table, because civil war in Africa doesn't really garner a lot of support and enthusiasm on the part of Americans. We see it, we read about it, and we see it on [the] news all the time. But when you added the element of slavery as a tool of war -- that was something new. Then people started prodding President Bush. I never will forget, at a ceremony when he signed the Sudan Peace Act, he said, "The reason I'm here signing this peace act is because all of you prodded me, and I know you'll continue to prod me." That was the process, I think, that led to the peace accords that they now enjoy.
While peace was breaking out, genocide and war were breaking out in the western part of Sudan against the Darfurians. Now we find ourselves, a year later, dealing with the issue of genocide in western Sudan and the displacement of millions of people, the raping of women, and these were Muslims. In the south, it was the north against the south, Muslims against Christians and animists. Now the government was turning its attention, using some of the same tactics, on Africans who happened to be Muslims. We found ourselves right back, starting all over again, addressing this issue and prodding the administration to do something about it.
We're looking specifically at some of the grassroots activism that has been doing this prodding. Go back to the earlier days you were talking about in Sudan, trying to get this coalition started. Why do you think it was hard initially for the African-American churches to come together with the white evangelicals? Was it that the white evangelicals didn't have relationships and didn't reach out? You mentioned there was a lack of trust.
It's a good question. I think it was a combination of several things. There was a lack of awareness. It wasn't being discussed in the news, even though African-American churches have missions, particularly in western Africa, but apparently not a relationship with northern Africa and, in particular, Sudan -- which, by the way, is the largest country in Africa. Time after time, minister after minister would tell me, "I didn't know." That was number one. Number two, there was a disconnect between evangelical, conservative, Republican-oriented ministries and, in essence, the black church. That had a lot to do with politics that were going on at the time. You've got to remember, you had this great divide. You had this election season between the Clintons on the left and the Bushes on the right. White evangelicals were supporting the first Bush administration. Black churches were supporting Clinton. There was this lack of trust and this disconnect. The question was, how do you find the moral center? That's something that Reverend Fauntroy kept talking about: "There's a moral center here, Joe. We've got to find that moral center and work at it." I just didn't realize how difficult it was to find it, but we did, and we found it by virtue of our active participation. But believe me, we were suspect by the people on the right and we were cautioned by churches on the left.
Were you a bridge between two communities that didn't necessarily interact very much?
There's no question that we were a bridge, and we brought them together. I knew we were together when Dick Armey, the conservative former Majority Leader of the House of Representatives, said to me, "I've never been on the same platform with Charlie Rangel in the 30 years we've been in Congress together on any issue except this one." And Charlie Rangel nodded in agreement. Charlie Rangel and Dick Armey joined hands on this issue for the purpose of trying to bring peace to Sudan and end slavery. They both agreed that in 30 years they'd never been together on any issue, but they were on this, and to have those two men at a news conference, I think, went a long way to sending a signal that if these two political opponents can get together, then what is keeping people who claim to believe in the same Christ, the same Bible, the same philosophy -- what is keeping them from working together over the issue of war and slavery and inhumanity?
Are you happy with the coalition right now, as the focus has shifted to Darfur?
Yes, I'm pleased, for two reasons. One is that there's a tremendous amount of attention being paid to this issue, whereas before it was very difficult. The media wasn't interested. Sudan was too difficult to visit or trot off to. It was far away. It was expensive. When you go to southern Sudan -- unlike northern Sudan where Khartoum is, the capital, which has hotels and electricity, in southern Sudan there is very little electricity. I had reporters who refused to go because, when they would ask, "What hotel do we stay in?," "There are no hotels." "What do we eat?" "We eat whatever the villagers make for you." "Where do we sleep?" "Under a tent, on the ground." "How long will it take to get there, and can I get in and can I get out?" These were all questions that were answered but also prevented seasoned reporters from going.
With Darfur, though, I think people immediately related to the issue of genocide. They remembered Rwanda. The coalition stuck together. I thought initially it would be difficult because we were dealing with Muslims, not Christians. But the coalition has held together, and there are examples of them working on this humanitarian issue of genocide despite the religious differences.
 |
|
|
|
Are you satisfied with the level of black church activism on this?
No, and I'm not satisfied with the level of white church activism. But I'm certainly not satisfied with the level of African-American churches. There is so much that can be done -- without being overcritical, because I'm one of these individuals who believe you cannot embarrass someone to do the right thing; you've got to explain to them as best you can their role. I gave a speech one time using as a backdrop Luke 16, the story of the rich man who watched Lazarus die, who wanted just crumbs from his table. The rich man ended up in hell; Lazarus, the poor man, ended up in heaven with the rich man begging for just a drop of water. The story is that you knew he was in hell on earth and you didn't do anything. I tried to use that as a backdrop to explain what our responsibility is. Some churches have responded. It's interesting [that] it's the smaller churches. It really is the churches you expect the least from who end up giving you the most. They not only give you moral support, but we had churches where their Boy Scout troops raised money. It might have only been a few hundred dollars, but they said, "Here, go free slaves." There were churches that took up a collection after I would speak [and] would say, "Here, take this back." It might only be, again, a few hundred dollars. But it was the smaller churches that understood immediately and gave what they could. There is much more that can be done in terms of giving and politically prodding the Bush administration to do what's right.
When you look at places like Illinois, you see a lot of leadership coming from the African-American community. Do you see more and more people stepping in also from the black church community and really playing a leadership role?
I was never so proud of a young congressman as I was of Jesse Jackson Jr., who stood in a conference committee meeting of Republicans and Democrats. They were trying to figure out how much money was going to Sudan to end starvation and to stop the genocide. He stood up in that conference and demanded that more money be put into the budget to end the genocide, to feed the hungry, to get aid to the people who needed it. You have the usual suspects in Chicago who have always been at the forefront of social change [and who] took on this issue. They didn't have to be prodded. They did what a lot of people did. They read about it, they heard about it, and they decided they had to do something about it. State Senator Jacqueline Collins from Illinois -- and I should also point out State Assemblyman William Paine out of New Jersey -- heard about it. I think Jacqueline Collins heard me on a program in Chicago, a black talk station, with Cliff Kelly, who's a colleague of mine. She's driving, she's listening in on the car radio, and she calls in and says, "I'm going to introduce the legislation." She has a divinity degree from Harvard. Then her church got involved and supported her. They passed legislation to divest public pension funds from the State of Illinois. There's $92.2 billion of state pension funds invested in companies doing business in Sudan -- $92.2 billion of pension funds from teachers, firemen, police officers, governors, legislators, secretaries, security guards, and most of them don't know it. Again, with the support that [Jacqueline Collins] got from churches, she was able to push this legislation through to the point that the governor signed it into law, even with opposition from the state treasurer, who used all kinds of excuses as to why we should continue to invest state pension fund money in a country guilty of genocide. Makes no sense whatsoever. And the same argument was used in New Jersey. I so enjoyed this race between New Jersey and Illinois to see who would be first in getting the legislation passed.
All this began, again, here in Washington on Labor Day of last year. One of the churches that was behind us from the beginning was New Bethel, Reverend Fauntroy's church. They never wavered. Even members of his church would come out and get arrested. We had Bishop C. Anthony Muse, who has a church here in the Washington area. His people came in vans, got arrested, demonstrated, picked a day. It was really the churches who had a tremendous consciousness about it. And the ministers said, "We're with you, we'll show up in front of that embassy, we'll bring our vans." We even had a church, Covenant Baptist Church, where they came in their choir robes and joined us on the picket line. They saw to it that they had members there every day representing their church. It wasn't the big megachurches. It was small neighborhood churches that said, "Not on my watch! This is not going to happen on our watch!" Those were the ones that I will always be grateful to, because they kept it alive. Ninety-nine percent of the time there was never a TV camera or a reporter anywhere around.
There seems to be a new generation of leadership in the black community pushing this issue.
No question about it. We always talk about the torch being passed. What I always tell people is that, first, you've got to keep the torch lit, and secondly, you've got to have somebody to pass it to, and thirdly, these people have to be in the race. That's what's happening, and it's not just being passed in the black community. What I'm hoping will happen -- and it is happening -- you're not only seeing state legislators who now are introducing the legislation to divest, like we did 20 years ago with South Africa, and that was not easy. It was difficult. It's a different time now, but now what we're finding out is that students are going back to campuses, and they're calling for the divestment of pension funds and endowment funds. Harvard has divested. Stanford has divested. That's because of student activity. The Episcopal Church has divested. This is the next step. So we go from state legislators and state pension funds to universities and endowments. Now we have to challenge churches. The Catholic Church should divest. The Protestants and their organizations, the Mormons -- you name it, there's so much to be done. What it really takes, quite honestly, is participation by average people. That's really what it takes. It takes people prodding their bishops, prodding their ministers, prodding their church leaders, prodding their university presidents and also their board of trustees. I suspect it will happen.
Divestment, as I said during the bill-signing ceremony in New Jersey this summer, will not end genocide in Sudan or Darfur, but what it will do is provide momentum. That's really what we're talking about. Each of these little actions provides momentum. Divestment didn't free Nelson Mandela from Robbin Island. Divestment didn't end apartheid in and of itself, but it was part of a momentum that brought it about. That's why it's so important that we keep doing what we're doing.
How important is that grassroots activism, putting pressure on?
It is the most important thing. There is nothing more important. ... That's the element we have to keep alive. You would not have had a divestment bill in the State of Illinois or New Jersey or four other states and more to come, if it were not for the activism of everyday little people. You would not have the attention that you have on genocide or slavery in Sudan if it wasn't for a group of kids at a school in Denver that had a bake sale or collected their pennies and their change to buy the freedom of slaves. This is what catches people's attention.
What I've learned down through the years of my activism is [that] no piece of legislation, no bill, no law moves without grassroot[s] involvement. It doesn't happen. We are responsible for raising the consciousness of our elected officials and leaders. Can you think of any act, law, or legislation that has been passed unanimously by one of the most divided United States Congresses we've had in recent years? I can't think of one except the question of genocide in Sudan. Here you had African-American liberals who were members of the Congressional Black Caucus who crossed the aisle and joined hands with conservative Republicans, and they agreed to pass a resolution declaring genocide in Darfur. Then they went and did the same thing in the United States Senate. That was because 1,500 people representing 1,500 lives a day that die in Darfur stretched out on a hot July day, when the temperature had to be over 90 degrees, and we had what was called a "die-in." These were just everyday people, black and white, who responded to a radio show, who came and stretched out. Then you had grandmothers. I never will forget the arrest of five -- they called themselves "the Sudan grannies" -- grandmothers and one great-grandmother who was 82 years old, who all decided that they were going to be handcuffed, arrested, and placed in jail in protest against the genocide in Sudan. Oh, yes, Danny Glover showed up, Ben and Jerry showed up, Charlie Rangel was arrested, Congressman Bobbie Rush from Chicago was among the first to be arrested. But it was these grassroots people who did it, again, when there were no cameras. It's a very interesting movement. It's very interesting to see it develop. When Danny Glover showed up, we had more cameras than we had demonstrators. When Ben and Jerry came, it made the front page of the WASHINGTON POST. But when these five grandmothers got arrested, they did it in silence. There was no one there, but they still went through with it. It is always grassroots. I've never participated in any movement in my career in which the change hasn't taken place due to the movement of little people. I don't care what it is. I don't care if it's the Voting Rights Act, the civil rights bill. It's always been the activism from the grassroots up. Things in this country change and always have, from the beginning of this country, from the bottom up, never the top down.
What was the influence of the Internet and the Web in helping connect people? Do you think that's played a role in keeping the grassroots together?
You're talking to someone who remembers mimeograph machines and overnight messages -- I forgot what they used to call them. But oh, yes, we were able to form coalitions via the Internet. You never know who started the coalition. I'm certain the reason we had 1,500 people that showed up on a couple of weeks' notice in front of the White House on the die-in was because it went on the Internet -- especially getting the young people involved. Several organizations are involved and they all have links to one another. You can go to my Web site and that'll link you to four or five other Web sites that'll link you to four or five other sites. It's a brand new organizing tool that we didn't have before. It's been masterful. That's why literally hundreds, if not thousands of people can show up at a demonstration at a moment's notice. It has been a very effective tool that I'm trying to learn more and more about. It frustrates my son, who knows everything about it, and my grandchildren, who know everything about it. They certainly know more than I do, but it's a great tool. Can you imagine if we'd had the Internet during the March on Washington when Martin Luther King gave his famous "I Have a Dream" speech? Instead of 250,000, it probably would have been a million.
|
|
Read the related R&E story "
