St. Paul recorder. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1934-2000, 1962-07-20

! Is uIIle more IIlan an expansion
of two long articlse he wrote for
Harper's, and Lomax is Fischer's
most frequently quoted authority
Not that Lomax can be blamed
for all Of Fischer's statements,
although the two share a central
theme. For Lomax has long been
insisting that the NAACP and
most of the other established Ne
gro organizations are outmoded
and the Negro people in revolt
against them.
And a curious case he makes for
his thesis. The Negro revolt" as
Lomax sees it, is symbolized by
the sit-in demonstrations, the
Freedom Riders, the Black Mus
Inns, Martin Luther King, or any
other group whose national head
quarters is not located at 20 w.
10th st.
Lomax admits - but briefly and
in passing - that the sit-in weap-
on was first conceived and ex-
ecuted by NAACP branches. He
might have added that the legal
basis for the actions and prac-
tically every far-reaching court
decision upholding them resulted
from NAACP battles also.
And how can one accept an
evaluation of the NAACP's his
torical role and achievements from
an author who makes only a
couple of passing references. to a
man named Walter White?
But many things are quite SIM
pie for Lomax. He brings the
love" theory of the Southern
Christian Leadership Conference
and the "hate-all-whites" dictum
of Elijah Muhammads Black
Muslims together by remarking:
Although they are bitter ideolog-
ical enemies, there is only a thin
line between Muhammed and Mar
tin Luther King ="
And Lomax furnishes the basis
for Fischer's contention that 1.-The
Black Muslims seem to be more
effective than any other Negro
organization so far as stimulating
sense of pride and self-reliance"
when he writes, without qualifica-
ton, that:
mo sane man, black or white,
dares plan a mass program in
Harlem without including liar
lem Muslin LEADER Malcolm x.
For if it comes to a showdown,
Malcolm can muster more people
than Adam Powell, A. Phillip Ran
dolph, Martin Luther King and
Roy Wilkins all put together"
And Lomax tempts a reader
to question his own bonafides when
he states, equally fatty, that
Martin Luther King is not an
intellectual (nor) a scholar"
This is not to say that Lomax
has not written an important and
disturbing book when he stops
riding his pet NAACP hobby horse
and carefully digests the original
research Of others who have re-
corded the long history of Negro
revolt.
Few knowledgable observers will
contend that bureaucracy, infre-
ouent disdain for some of the
lowlier members, super-sensidNty
to criticism and jealousy of posi-
BILE rivals are absent from all
NAACP operations.
But a mere decrease Of 5000
from a membership of $4,000 in
the year just ended is hardly
evidence of a widespread revolt on
the part Of the people who at this
moment have 1900 representatives
in Atlanta in the largest NAACP
national conference In history.
When Lomax calls the Negroes
loss of faith in the white power
structure a result Of hoodlum de-
fiance Of the Supreme Courts de-
segregation decision; when he fhps
the coin to record the tragedy Of
old line Negro educators caught
between the squeeze Of the sit-ins
and the segregationists; when he
outlines the efforts Of youthful
Whitney Young to revitalize the
National Urban League, and the
achievements as well as the short
comings of the Kennedy Admins
tration, his book Is Informative as
well as exciting.
And only his editor at Harper's
magazine, John Fischer, might
disagree when he concludes:
The act Of being a Negro in
America consists in joining in
every way the liberal forces who
enjoy the challenge Of tomorrow
more than they do the comfortable
provincialism Of yesterday"