I hate to say but Canon makes a good point about the fact that some blacks don't want to go over to whites Halls but the reason he gives for it is WRONG in my own personal exp other blacks i have talked to about this issue for the last 20+yrs
Sorry, but that is the WAY IT IS. I was reporting from personal experience from just a year ago at a congregation in the south that I was associated with. Blacks tend to still be resentful of the white establishment and for many reasons still don't feel that comfortable associating with whites. So they withdraw.
Further, when I was much younger and went where the "need was greater" in Arkansas, there was always a problem with the black men reaching out and that's because in this particular small town, the employers of these men, who depended upon their jobs for a living would be sodomized by the white store owners and thus they were ashamed. Sodomy was a way to always remind the black men who they had to depend upon and so they wouldn't get too "uppity". So psychological segregation and prejudice are still practiced by some in the South. Plus I'd see confederate flags all the time in cars and trucks which was always a reminder, regardless of the smiling, apologetic face, that the South was a place where blacks and others had an inferior position.
Also, while all was well at the assemblies and at the kingdom halls, sometimes blacks who had grown so quickly, the territory for a single congregation was just a couple of city blocks. The territory got worked regularly. So sometimes we get some caravans together and go into the sparsely witnessed area in the very rich Palos Verdes Area, etc. Guess what? They didn't want blacks coming into that area and the brothers asked that we not work that territory.
Plus there was something else interesting that went on as well. That is, in the south, the blacks were told to only witness to blacks and work the black houses. That was fair enough. But the white missionaries would work the black areas too by preference. ???
Plus there was always the talk that ultimately, blacks never had high positions within the higher eschelons of the organization as much progressed had been made. But it was actually expressed in writing and in recognition, generally, that blacks were neither qualified nor probably had the "networking" skills or whatever to really be in leadership roles, particularly dealing with whites who resented them anyway.
And once while discussing on these very boards that I had a personal acquiantance with a very proud "registered racist" (he wasn't too bright, obviously, I liked him--but he just repeated what somone else told him), someone told me to be careful I don't get "eaten".
Problem is, I had already confirmed that the Southerns bar-b-qued the slaves for food, using children mostly in pot pies. Apparently, black flesh is sweeter tasting than white. Point being, this is an age-old sacred secret of the South that canabalism was customary in the South. But this is an age-old European secret as well who were also cannibals, particularly of black meat. The secret basis of the term QUI-SINE and BAR-B-QUE relate to that. QUE referring to CU or CUSH, and SINE referring to eat. Thus the highest form of dining was black flesh in Europe at one time. And, of course, Bar-Be-QUE = son of Cush.
So, when you REALLY know about the extent of the background of the South and you realize that white understand that blacks were not just cattle to them, but EDIBLE CATTLE it makes for a hard gap for some to get by. Eating black flesh and killing blacks for sport was part of the "Grand Old South" before the Northerners couldn't take it any more and had to free the slaves. They probably didn't care that much about freedom of rights either. The original plan was to free them and send them back to Africa. But the ratio of blacks to whites in the South was so great and their absence would cripple the South so terribly they were allowed to stay on and thus continue to help the South. They still barely made enough to make a living, but at least they were not at the whim and call of every white man, young or old, perverted or no.
So it's been "fashionable" of late to be multi-cultural but who knows when that will become passe? Plus blacks can't take it personally. Ghandi had the same problem with Christian Europeans in India and the Jews, who are as white as anybody, had problems with the white Christians in Germany. Ask any Native American Indian or any Asian or anybody? A key "racism" issue is characteristic of the Western European culture. And why not. The first person who ever penned the word "Master Race" was none other than Aristotle!
Now wouldn't it be interesting if Christ returned in the flesh at the second coming, not as a glorious Jew in the line of King David, or some pious monastery priest among the Jesuits, but as a flaming black ex-drag queen? Just to get the closet racists to jump ship to cut down on judgment day time?
God wouldn't do that to the racists, now would he? Isn't that overdoing it a bit wouldn't you say?
I guess, unless he hates people who look down on what he has created, calling what he made beautiful ugly.
As noted, the "666" on the Beast that identifies Christendom as the trinity believing Europeans, is the same "name" of their consistent hypocrital double standard of racism, KKK. The Nazis were thus aptly referred to as "Gog of Magog" who desolated Jerusalem, but it would seem those desires, policies and practices will again become an issue after the millennium when Gog of Magog rebels.
But why? Can't whites live in peace with the rest of mankind?
MY THEORY IS...that it has to do with wealth and the level of lifestyle that can be achieved if you're both white and rich. The exclusive clubs and all that must be a huge send up. But it works out that likely there will be no extravagantly rich in the new order since to really pull it off you need servants and lots of them, and that is not likely to happen. If you were rich, with billions of dollars and huge palace with a golf course for your back yard....how much fun would it be if you had to keep all that up yourself? Cut your own lawn? Cook your own food. Do your own housecleaning. Do you own shopping? Dust all that fine china? Not much fun right?
Which is the point. What seems so natural and glamorous to us and "successful" oftentimes is at the expense of someone elses poverty or freedom.
And isn't it interesting that those who are oppressed often bear the SHAME of the impropriety of the oppressor? We hate the child born out of wedlock more than we despise the parents that conceived it? Is that right?
But EVEN SO....considering ALL...PROBABLY, and I believe this, some do truly love everybody regardless of their color and some particularly because of that.
Which brings up one last experience of recent note. One new white brother was so very, very sensitive to the issue and how, when the blacks were not around whites would talk about them, that he was determined to marry a black sister and did so! So that's another issue--OVER COMPENSATION.
What I've found as well, is that often people of different races get along QUITE well in the insular environment of the organization. But once you start putting the races together, you know the sexual appeal is going to get going and the result are mixed romances and marriages, and that affects the entire family and community. Now some can accept that and it's fine, but others have a very hard time with it. It's like "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the military for gays. FANTASY and DENIAL are two often used means to deal with issues one is in the closet about. And some for those who are not only out of the closet but who still believe in white supremacy.
Considering all the above, I think the witnesses have done the most and gone the farthest to make each INDIVIDUAL feel his God-given sense of equality, in spite of the Eurocentric oppressive culture we live in. To that, they should respected for.
It's a strange world. Things will be different under the millennium, of course....
JCanon
