Friday, June 5, 2015

Discussion with Harold Michael Harvey on His Latest Book, Justice in the Round!

"We who desire justice, must of 

necessity, end the real causes of 

injustice, therefore, Semper Novi 

Quid ex Injustice."

--Harold Michael Harvey

Good Morning Everybody! I am honored to have an opportunity to spend time talking with Harold Michael Harvey, author of Justice in the Round: Essays on the American Jury System. For those who do not know him well. Here's a short biography...
Harold Michael Harvey is the author of the legal thriller Paper Puzzle. He writes on legal and political issues at He earned a Bachelor of Science Degree in political science from Tuskegee University and a Juris Doctorate from Atlanta Law School. He is winner of the "Outstanding Work in Newspaper Journalism Award" from the National Newspaper Publishers Association and has won two semi-monthly Political Pundits Prizes from A former practicing lawyer, Harvey now spends his days reading and writing. He lives in Atlanta, Georgia and writes wherever the muse takes him.
His latest book is nonfiction and follows his earlier legal thriller, Paper Puzzle. Check out my review if you haven't read it yet!

You know, I have to admit that even though I've interacted online with Harold Michael Harvey for many years and call him a friend, mainly because he has such an online presence, I am still somewhat shy in calling him by his first name.  Why? Well look at him in the above picture! He looks so distinguished, learned, and intellectual, with educational experience well beyond mine, that I feel, now, how did I get myself into this!?

Sooooo, I had to remedy that if only for my own need to communicate effectively... So meet Michael! If I saw him standing in a bookstore like this, besides his book, I would build myself up and be brave enough to go ask him to sign my copy of his book!

Thankfully, he signed it for me when he sent it and I became so involved in its words that I immediately knew I wanted to do an interview.

In my early enthusiasm for seeking a discussion, I blundered out with the question: How can Americans negotiate relationships between the United States and other countries, but refuse to negotiate a discussion within our own country about race relations? We all know something needs to be done. Why are not those in the right positions in government doing something!??! What needs to be done? Michael's response was a perfect start to the discussion, I think, immediately questioning the question itself...LOL

Your question is couched in such as way that it suggests the government has the burden of improving race relations in this country. The problems surrounding race relations in America were started by state action which initially determined that black men, women and children were sub-human and each the mere three-fifths equivalent of a white person. Our history has changed and shaped that equation. Racial conflicts shaped in Colonial America, however, have not kept pace with the changing role and scope of the law in matters of race.

I agree with the premise that the government’s role should be to ensure that its rules and regulations are fair to all people. As a practical matter, I tend to think that the “problem of race” in America is a people problem. Racial conflicts, I believe, are defined by how people, from their sundry cultural and racial backgrounds relate to each other on a daily basis. I recognize there are still areas in the law that do not favor black people in America, but by and large today, racial conflicts are not determined by government policy.

You ask why people in government are not doing something to solve the racial problems plaguing the land.  While I think the thrust should come from “We the people,” the nation’s 44th President, Barack Obama, has proposed on several occasions that there needs to be an honest and frank discussion on race in America. No other political leaders have followed his call to engage their constituency in this rather painful discussion on race.

In the private sector, the chairman of the board of Starbucks proposed to have all Starbuck associates write “Race Together” on each cup of java served in their stores around the country. His proposal received such a severe backlash from their loyal customer base, that the idea was canned after a week.
Herein lies the problem with resolving the racial divide: “We, the people” are not now willing to shed ourselves of preconceived notions developed when America operated under the fallacy that one race of men and women was superior to others. We will not be in a position to tackle this problem until we come to recognize the truth, “That all people are created equal and are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

With respect to your question, “What needs to be done?”

We the people must be willing to engage our neighbors from different racial and cultural backgrounds in honest discussions. Like lovers, we must be willing to bare our soul and view the soul of our neighbor as no different than our own.

Well, readers, you can see this is going to be an interesting and learning experience for me! Maybe some of you too? Oh, and by the way, since I've now seen the entire discussion, may I insert here my very sincere thanks to Harold Michael Harvey for spending so much time with me to put together this spotlight week on his book, Justice in the Round. I hope by the end of this article that you will have opened your heart and learned as much as I have...but, even more so, I hope you read the entire book! It's a must-read--all you have to do is watch the evening news to know it!

Michael, I know you write for AllVoices... (I was there for a while before I got so fancy with additional material for my review articles, that I really needed to have readers come to my blog to get the full benefit!) How did you decide to start writing for that online newspaper and how did you choose the specific essays that were included in your book? 

Well, it’s a long story. Several friends whom I had met on the social media site Gather recommended that I submit articles to Allvoices. In 2009, I created a profile at Allvoices, but did not submit any articles. At that time, I had just completed my novel Paper Puzzle. I did not know if Allvoices was a fit for where I wanted my writing to go. Then in early 2012 Allvoices launched the American Pundit Contest to encourage writers to submit articles on the 2012 presidential campaign. I thought I could win that contest so I began to submit articles. My third or fourth article, which was about Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, pointing her finger into the face of President Barack Obama generated over 350,000 page views.  I had gained a following so I continued to write for Allvoices until last fall when they changed their editorial direction and began to publish more non-political pieces.

In writing about the presidential election, I got an opportunity to utilize my political science education. When the Trayvon Martin tragedy occurred it presented a challenge to incorporate my legal experience into my reporting. So I drove down to Sanford, Florida and covered a news conference held by the New Black Panther Party. My reporting in Allvoices broke the story on the New Black Panther Party placing a “Wanted Dead or Alive bounty” on George Zimmerman. As the Zimmerman case progressed, I followed the court. Simultaneously, I started to follow the Michael Dunn prosecution for the murder of Jordan Davis in Jacksonville, Florida. I covered both of these trials for Allvoices. Following the surprising jury verdicts in both cases, it was clear to me that the people of this nation needed a crash course in understanding the cultural mores of races different from their own.  When I took a look at my coverage of the trial, I realized that I had focused on areas that no one in mainstream media had covered. My thought upon this realization was: Things would never get any better if my views were not widely circulated.  So I decided to sandwich my columns on these two trials for Allvoices between an Opening Statement and a Closing Argument and birthed Justice in the Round: Essays on the American Jury System.

OK, I have to gasp and say, Wow!, about the "Wanted Dead or Alive" story! Mainly because you broke the story! I think one key issue that comes out of your response is that "the news" we see (and hear) is also an issue as we look at the topic of Justice...You had focused on areas that no one else covered...and yet that has become part of the wedge, the separation that has arisen. Do you agree?

Yes, I agree. A big part of the problem in race relations stems in the sounds bits we are fed by network news programs. It seems that the media spends most of their air time devoted to the black community in covering the negative issues. They spend very little time on positive accomplishments of black people; so naturally, white children seeing these negative images of black people cannot help but grow up being leery of black people. If all you know about black people is learned on the evening news, then you know virtually nothing about black people.

Also, with respect to breaking the story on the bounty that was placed on George Zimmerman, there was several local, national and international news organizations present at the news conference when the bounty was announced. However, the other reporters pretended that Mr. Muhammad had not said anything of the sorts. I asked a young female reporter who was there covering the press conference for the Orlando Sentinel what did she make of that and she said she did not intend to report it. Due to some technical issues I was not able to file my story until after I returned to Atlanta over the weekend. I realized that several days had passed and no one had reported on it, so I filed a story about the bounty on the head of George Zimmerman. I believed that it was important for the public to understand that matters were about to get out of hand if Sanford, Florida did not move to arrest George Zimmerman. Shortly, after other news outlets picked up this story, Zimmerman was arrested.

And that, dear Michael, all speaks for itself! Thank you for including it in this important discussion... It certainly confirms what we see today on television and news sites.

I know you had a doctoral student suggest that you put this book together. Do you think you would have done it otherwise? Specifically, you've written a wonderful legal thriller--on what was your decision made to switch to nonfiction? What do you see in the future for your writing activities?

My friend, Leslye Joy Allen, a doctoral student in history at Georgia State University, prodded me to publish more of my political writings because of the historical backdrop that I use to tell a contemporary story. I have always thought of myself as an essayist. Additionally, I have tackled tough subjects in my writing. The legal thriller Paper Puzzle deals with social mores and the nuances of race relations. Many of the sub-themes of Paper Puzzle are played out in the jury trials of George Zimmerman and Michael Dunn; as well as, the grand jury proceedings in Ferguson and Staten Island. When I decided to discuss the dichotomy of race, I thought I would find a larger audience willing to, at least listen to my diatribes on race, if the discussion was couched in the intrigue of a whodunit. In the future you will see a diverse literary offering. I am working on a sequel to Paper Puzzle. My working title is Dead Giveaway.  I have completed a screenplay, Cover up in the Confederacy, about the Montgomery Police Department’s 1975 cover up of the killing of Bernard Whitehurst, an unarmed black man, who was shot by a police officer, some say by mistake and others believe intentionally to silence a competitor in the street sale of marijuana. 

I admit that I'm partial to fiction with an underlying motive on specific issues so I look forward to reading the sequel to Paper Puzzle. In using fiction, we see the entire story surrounding the race issue, merged within a larger picture. For me, especially now where I live in the country, I rarely have the opportunity to get involved with today's issues in discussions. With fiction, I can see both sides and better understand, being able to follow the dialogue of the characters...

In the quote at the top, your final phrase was Always knows what the Injustice! Yes, of course I had to look it up and think I understand what you mean...but for purposes of this discussion, could you share more about this mandate, please.
As I translate this Latin phrase, “Justice always knows injustice.” To me this means that justice flows out of injustice. Therefore, when we look at unjust situations, we have the remedy at hand. The enemy has been identified. All we have to do to move from injustice to justice is to refrain from doing the unjust thing.

Yes..."all we have to do to move from injustice to justice is to refrain from doing the unjust thing! Readers, that's a new quote that should be spread far and wide!

You include in your Foreword that many friends who learned of your project to write on the jury system, commented on the George Zimmerman and Michael Dunn Acquittals, in particular, as the beginning of your journey on the book. You also specifically indicate that your book does not offer any proposals for the reform of the jury system. Michael, what would you like to see evolve as a result of your book?

Glenda, I would like to see a frank and honest discussion on race. The problem with justice in this country is not with the weights and measures; it is rooted in the racial dichotomies present in our legal matters.

While I agree in principle, I can only respond that it's got to be ongoing discussions... I think just for this discussion, you and I have found we need to work at understanding the meaning of what each of us is trying to say. That alone convinces me that we must make it a priority to be able to admit when we don't understand the other individual, perhaps due to racial perspective or just because of individual, personal perspectives and experience... So I would add that I would hope for the willingness to participate in the first place on a daily basis, before it becomes a legal matter...

You talk about the prospective jurors--their private lives, including their biases and prejudices--that come with them to court. And with that our individual race consciousness:
Race, that unspoken problem dating back to the dawn of Colonial American civilization rules the jury box every time the dichotomy of race is a factor in criminal prosecutions...
Michael, you acknowledged in saying this--that we are all "closet racists," and that time tells whether we ever change. If we accept this as a basic truth, can we ever expect to be able to put together a jury that has indeed, "moved past and changed feelings about racial biases?"

Glenda, I believe it is possible to resolve any problem that confronts humankind. Race has been a big problem in our country since day one. It is a solvable problem, but like any equation, it cannot be solved if we do not diligently seek the right answer. As long as you are talking at me and not to me; and vice versa, we will never get it right. I believe that communication is the best thing between human beings. If we would only talk and listen and listen and talk we can ensure a fair shake at the bar for all of our citizens.

Yes, I think that's what I was getting at earlier when I thought there needs to be a daily willingness to work on resolution of the communication flow.

In your first essay, "Opening Statement," you throw it out there immediately:

Before throwing down the race card, get through the essay where the prospective juror in one of my trials asked a courthouse deputy: "What do you think about that Nigger lawyer from Atlanta?
Well Michael, I couldn't wait until later to ask about it! Bottom line, did you even allow him to be considered for the jury?

No Glenda, I did not. I told Judge Jefferson Davis that I wanted that juror stricken and that I did not want to use my preemptory challenges to strike him. I had the life of an innocent black man in my hands. He was accused of killing a 17 year-old white boy by shooting him in the head. I did not want to chance that I could reform a 75 year old southern male in the three weeks the trial was slated to last. I’ve given some persuasive arguments in my day, but I don’t think I’m that good, at least not so good as to roll the dice with another man’s life hanging in the balance.

And, that too, supports the recognition that it is our individual pasts and experiences that forms our actions... That's a self-analysis that many would find it hard to achieve, I would imagine. You go on to talk about wearing the "racist shoes." When I say no, I don't wear them, I want to quickly point out that there are few Blacks in the area where I was born and have lived. I'm not sure that makes a difference or not. 

My first Black friend was Marian and we rode the bus to school together to begin 7th grade. Her friend, Carolyn, was White. Did I get any comments from home about my new friends? Yes, about Carolyn, who was Catholic! Geesh! Religion trumped Race for prejudice in my family...

Marian was instrumental in setting the tone for my future racial feelings. As you all can see, I've been a "little" overweight all my life (LOL). Well, our school was right across the street from a bakery and we visited there most mornings before we went into the school. I got a potato doughnut with white icing (if you have never tasted them, you've lost a real treat since I don't think they are made anymore!). 

Marian got a chocolate brownie with icing.  As we walked out the door, Marian offered me a bite of her brownie. I immediately said no--mainly because I never was much for eating brownies, LOL). What she said then, I shall never forget: "No, go ahead and take a bite before I've even started eating..." I continued to say no, I was good with my doughnut... What I interpreted that offer to mean was that Marian, through her own background, knew of White prejudice. But she knew me and liked me well enough to offer anyway... She was the one cognizant of the fact that I might not want to eat after a Black person... I was floored because she said it, not because I had ever considered it in the first place.

Recently I was talking with a Black man about my age and, because of reading Oprah's latest book club selection, I asked him if I could tell him about it, because I knew I was going to give it a bad review... I was overjoyed that he had the same reaction as I did when I told him about some parts. He said that I should be truthful, and I confessed that it was only because of Oprah's involvement that I hesitated...because I knew the book would go out to millions of readers... I explained that I read many books about or by Black authors and his facial expression revealed surprise... I saw just a flash of disbelief in my new friend's response to what I had just said...

So, I've shared a few personal experiences to point out that, yes, the "racist shoes" do walk both ways...and, yet, with both of us working on a relationship between us at the same time, we quickly got past that bias...

Since then, I, of course, have faced the reality of racial prejudice continuing throughout the world... I don't see an end to it, Michael. But this discussion may change my present opinion...and maybe start others into thinking about what shoes they may wear on the race issue... Thoughts?

Glenda, you have had an interesting set of racial experiences. I believe in both scenarios the parties had difference understandings about the racial mores existing in the world they live. This leads to misunderstandings. The cure for misunderstandings is communication. If only we would speak honestly, as well as, listen in earnest, we can solve this age old problem. I am the eternal optimist. I believe we can. If we do not try, our system of justice will fall into anarchy. “My name is Justice – Justice in the Round.”

Exactly, my first experience in 7th grade helped guide me through the rest of my life in acknowledging a need to be aware of cultural backgrounds. The second experience, in 2015, was a willingness on my part to ask to look at the racial issue together, but recognizing that, in a short discussion, we still caught our personal backgrounds coming into play. Maybe if AllVoices is moving away from hard news, you and I should start a discussion column...LOL..there! Or you could write an essay and I'd come and argue or support what you've said... I've enjoyed my time this week studying and rereading your book!

The Essay, "They always get away,"  was full of page turn-downs for me. The title could be controversial, especially on who was saying the phrase, don't you think?

I believe our society advances out of the controversy.  So I do not shy away from controversy. The entire book is controversial. I would not have spent several years working on this manuscript if it was not controversial. With respect to who is saying it, first George Zimmerman used this phrase in reference to black people, then we find later in this essay, my college classmate, Cheryl Lattimore gives a new twist to this phrase when Zimmerman got away.

The following was an intriguing statement for me:
Almost as soon as President Barack Obama commenced his service, he was rejected, vilified and blocked at every turn to carry out the duties of his office, by a group, which cannot in all honesty be described, as the loyal opposition.
I think this is true, and although I refused to get much into politics because I've grown to trust few individuals, of any race, I wonder whether those that are White and/or powerful, never thought there would be a chance for him to win... and when he did, their "tyrant child" came out ready to kill him politically? Too harsh? I have not heard or seen such political rumblings, no matter what our previous White presidents got into, including Clinton's sex scandal and Bush's actions to get us into War...and then there's Nixon... The only negative thing I can think of about Obama is that he's working to do his best with issues that have been around for a very long time... Who knew Obama would try to be an effective President?! Ok, excuse a little sarcasm--but at least I voice it during the right discussion, didn't I?

I believe there is never a wrong time to voice a deep seated belief. On the other hand, I never had any doubt President Obama would be an effective President. Those who discounted his effectiveness going in were looking at the color of his skin and not at the content of his character and educational accomplishments.

I was interested in your section about Tuskegee Institute, having read two books* and other writing about actions by Adolph Caso, Publisher of Branden Books...
The nation was also plagued by a dire need for Blacks to acquire the skills and education to live in a "so-called" civilized society. Those Blacks had, for the most part, been hewers of wood and clogs in someone else's commercial profit center while being stripped of all sense of human dignity and socialization.   It was incumbent upon those, like Adams and Washington, who had lived in the big house with their masters and had seen the ways of White men, to bring their brothers and sisters out of the fields of centuries of dis-socialization and inhumane treatment by teaching them the ways and mores of their new country...
OK, Michael, I've seen and signed off on financial documents in the millions, to cover such bureaucratic nonsense as making every single room in every single building totally accessible, that I'm pretty clear on my opinion...LOL... How does this compare with your feelings on reparations for Black slaves? Do you think that responding to one major discrimination charge will even begin to settle what has been lost? What about all the women, Black and White women, who have endured sexual harrassment and abuse by, yes, normally White men. Do we take turns on payback? And how do we judge and respond to the mental cruelty to those individuals...

First, African (black) people were never the slaves of American citizens.  They were in a condition of enslavement. Secondly, you and I are talking apples and oranges. In Justice in the Round, I make a case for reparatory justice.  Your focus is on discrimination, something that has occurred since the days of enslavement. Discrimination has its roots in treating one American citizen differently than another American citizen. Reparatory justice deals with compensation for that period of time when African Americans had no legal rights under American law and worked and suffered without compensation.  So until we are on the same page with respect to reparatory justice, almost anything I say in response to your understanding of my thesis in “They always get away,” will be misunderstood.

Ahhhh, yes, I did not understand the difference. My question in responding is obvious--connected to my own experiences and trying to make a comparison, for understanding. Perhaps this alone deserves further discussion, although your answer certainly forces a realization that communication must be open and honest...and must continue until we both understand...

For purposes of this discussion, I am not going to dwell on specific cases covered in the book... I believe there was definitely something wrong at some level.  I did select two of the many videos available on the Zimmerman case.
Videos were selected randomly 

Any immediate reactions or comments regarding the worthiness of the videos in sending or not sending the right message. I admit that I was appalled that all the jurors were women--I expected more from women for some unknown reason...

Both of those videos speak for themselves. There is not much I can add at this point in time.

The following paragraph intrigued me...

If we had any notion that our White brothers and sisters had cleared their hearts of racial animosity on the day that President Lyndon Johnson had signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it disappeared before we took ten steps towards the entrance of the stadium where Wallace was scheduled to speak...
My question became--when the war freed the slaves, how long did it take to give up hope that things had changed? Then when Civil Rights was signed, it only took minutes... Do any of us still have the ability to hope that those Whites who are Haters, will ever change?

To the extent that I understand your question, African Americas never gave up hope of freedom, even to this very day; there is hope that the conditions of Ferguson, Staten Island and Baltimore will soon be replaced with Justice in the Round. Second, I am not sure we understand the same historical record of civil rights. For instance, when I was three years old the Supreme Court struck down the separate but equal doctrine in Brown v. The Topeka Board of Education, however, the school system in my county did not eliminate the dual system of education until I walked from the black junior high school onto the campus of the white junior high school in 1965, sixteen years later. Third, it is not only whites who are haters that we need to be concerned with, we should be equally concerned with whites who do not think of themselves as haters, but who would not wish to see the privileges of white skin eradicated. Moreover, I am an eternal optimist; I believe it is never too late for people to change. Albeit the majority of white haters, will be haters when the Messiah comes. The white people who can change are those who do not consider themselves racial haters, but who view issues from a white world view, without considering the world view of their black countrymen and women. There are more white people in this classification than there are white haters. It is this group that deserves our energy and focus.

You are right...

Specific to Tuskegee, a section of the book begins with the heading:

Ignore the Race Question, Build Businesses and a Strong Work Ethic. Ninety years after its birth, Tuskegee focused its attention on business education. The school's first principal, Booker T. Washington founded the National Negro Business League in 1900...
Do you see Tuskegee as an effective institution today and are they responding effectively to the original plans? This item prompted my question:
This gets to the nexus of what plagues African American communities in this country. There is never any attempt to capitalize upon the goodwill and legacy already achieved by institutions of black cultural development in America. We continue to re-create the wheel without moving forward.
Well the passage you cite is taken out of context and I think that readers will have to read that whole section to get an understanding of my thoughts on the Tuskegee experience from 1881 through today. I believe Tuskegee is effective today in that she continues to produce men and women who are leaders in science, law and politics. You might recall that Judge Belvin Perry, who tried the Casey Anthony case in Orlando, Florida several years ago, is a graduate of Tuskegee. He and I were classmates. Also, Marilyn Mosby, the City Prosecutor in Baltimore, who is prosecuting six police officers for the death of Freddie Gray, is a Tuskegee graduate. So, with respect to the students, the university continues to produce professionals who are making major contributions to the nation and the world. Tuskegee is following the script as it was drawn up by Lewis Adams, its founder and chief mentor to Booker T. Washington. Yet I concede that Tuskegee has temporarily lost her way in leading Africa Americans out of bondage into full participation in American life and development. 

This seems like a perfect final question for this discussion:
LOVE IS THE ANSWER...The antidote of Black people in the parlance of the 1960s was to see all rightness in all things black and wickedness in all things White. 
Then Eva Jefferson, the first Black President of the Student Government Association found herself "groping for a way to place into context the changing mood of black people toward the white privileged class... "I could not resolve what to do with the white people who were my friends, because no matter how much I could hate a white face walking down the street, I couldn't hate those white people I had grown close to and no amount of rationalization could negate their basic good." [Jet Magazine, 1971] 
Michael, this, too, is what I grope with and specifically for Christians, or those who profess to be Christians... How can those Whites who choose to hate Blacks and other non-Whites, choose to hate a race when there is no rational reason or basis for that hate? 

I’ve been on a life-long quest to find an answer to this exact question. My journey began when I was about five years old and my grandmother had that talk with me that African American parents have been having with their male children since the first black child came up missing in the village after the appearance of Europeans on the African continent. I haven’t figured out this equation in the intervening 59 years, but I am getting close to the answer.

This is an important discussion, so I'm going to turn the tables on myself. Michael, do you have any questions for this White Non-Hating Blacks woman? I will even caveat my statement with the recognition that I oppose violence, no matter what race. And that especially goes for Any Policemen who kill without justification that is clear and proven...And I don't mean that just because a jury finds somebody innocent, that this was clear and proven. It's not the jury system, is it? It's the People...

I do have a few rhetorical questions for you. You have read Justice in the Round and we have had a good conversation about the issues expressed in the book. However, I noticed from the stem of the questions that you asked, you were actually talking to me about your point of view and not talking with me regarding my perspective on race and justice in America. The whole world knows the white perspective on these issues. We get a daily dose of the white world’s perception on the evening news. What the world does not get is how African Americans view their condition and the stratagems necessary to resolve their legal relationship with the American government. Why do you suppose this is? What if your thoughts about race relations in America were all wrong? What if my views were totally correct?

I am humbled by your observation. I had just begun to think that when I read your response above. The fact is you have spent your entire life since the age of 5 thinking and studying and learning... I am now 70 and I am just opening my eyes... not to the issue, but, rather, for the need for empathy for something I have not spent time and experience with...

Why did it take that long? I think what you said about the evening news is a major part (as well as even school text books), we (white people) have not been exposed to the non-white perspective on issues... It may not be intentional by me, or any individual white person, but when I consider that, I can only acknowledge the truth of it...

The American Negro is different than any other minority group in America. Different because they were captured, forced into a dehumanizing system of enslavement and transported hundreds of miles from their home continent. Not only have Africans had to overcome the hardships of enslavement, they have had to deal with centuries of lies told on them regarding their character and worthiness for inclusion in the human race. None of the other “so called minority groups” you mentioned earlier come close to this travesty of injustice that has been perpetuated upon African Americans. Rhetorically speaking, you tell me who should get the first piece of the reparatory justice pie? Should it be white women? Should it be members of the LGBT community? Should it be veterans? Should it be Latino? Should it be black men, women and children?

My name is Justice – Justice in the Round.

Any response could only be to acknowledge my sanctimonious ignorance. I am indeed a White person who has had no real understanding of Justice for African Americans. Not because of not caring, but because I really didn't understand the extent of my ignorance... Now, may I...close with my very personal thoughts...

No comments:

Post a Comment