Some newly discovered columns shed light on the shocking views expressed by one of the Democrat’s favorite politicians.
Rep. [score]Keith Ellison[/score] of Minnesota, now in the running to be DNC chair, has attracted the support of Sens. [score]Bernie Sanders[/score], [score]Elizabeth Warren[/score], and [score]Harry Reid[/score]. Many think that Ellison, a black Muslim, would make a powerful statement leading the DNC. Ellison’s past has gained attention from the media, with Ellison being accused of anti-Semitism and ties to the Nation of Islam.
Back in 2006, when Ellison was first entering national politics, Scott W. Johnson wrote in the Weekly Standard:
Ellison was born Catholic in Detroit. He states that he converted to Islam as an undergraduate at Wayne State University. As a third-year student at the University of Minnesota Law School in 1989-90, he wrote two columns for the Minnesota Daily under the name “Keith Hakim.” In the first, Ellison refers to ‘Minister Louis Farrakhan,’ defends Nation of Islam spokesman Khalid Abdul Muhammad, and speaks in the voice of a Nation of Islam advocate. In the second, ‘Hakim’ demands reparations for slavery and throws in a demand for an optional separate homeland for American blacks.
Around 1990, Ellison, then a University of Minnesota law student known as Keith E. Hakim, wrote several columns in the student newspaper that are getting a second look.
One column defended Farrakhan against charges of anti-Semitism; a second suggested the creation of a state for black residents. In 1995, Ellison helped organize a delegation to Farrakhan’s Million Man March in Washington.
The Daily Caller News Foundation did some digging to find the columns written in the Minnesota Daily under the pen name “Keith E. Hakim.”
TheDCNF obtained scans of four columns written by “Hakim” as a law student. Ellison was around 26 years old at the time these columns were written and published.
Over four columns, “Hakim” advocates cash reparations paid from whites to blacks, calls the Constitution the “best evidence of a white racist conspiracy to subjugate other peoples,” and proposes making a separate country for black people.
The first column, published on November 1, 1989, is titled “African-Americans are best equipped for fighting drugs.”
The piece opens up with the sentence:
Years ago, it was slavery and, more recently, the Jim Crow system. But today it appears that the rationale for black people having ‘no rights which a white man is bound to respect’ is crime.
In the column, Ellison writes that the black community does a better job keeping drugs off the streets than the police do. The Nation of Islam is specifically mentioned and praised for having the “most notable results” in fighting drugs.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, hardly an enemy of the Left, describes the Nation of Islam as having a “bizarre theology of innate black superiority over whites.”
In Minneapolis and across the country, this black crime thing manifests itself as the War on Drugs and as police brutality. The white perceptual link between the two is simple: Drugs are out of hand; in fact, America is at War Against Drugs.
Also, black criminals are out of hand. They rape; they form gangs; they drive down property values. When the black crime problem and the drug problem intersect, all African-Americans become drug suspects and any violent act is justified.
A scan of the entire column can be viewed here.
The next column, coming later the same month, ran on November 27, 1989 and is titled “Minister Farrakhan never claimed to be a ‘Malcolm X.’”
The article discusses the nature of racism.
Racism means conspiracy to subjugate and actual subjugation. That means planned social, economic, military, religious and political subjugation of whites. It cannot be intelligently argued that the Nation of Islam is doing this. In fact, blacks have no history of harming or subjecting whites as a class. On the other hand, whites have it written into their very Constitution that blacks shall be considered three-fifths of a person for purposes of taxation and representation of their white owners. Their Constitution also makes provisions for the return of runaway slaves. Their constitution is the bedrock of American law; it’s the best evidence of a white racist conspiracy to subjugate other peoples.
The column also seems to defend the opinion that asserting interests of a racial group doesn’t make one a racist.
I would like to offer an explanation of why anyone who boldly asserts the interests of blacks is assailed as a racist, a philanderer or a criminal,” he continues. “It goes back to those old American laws forbidding anyone from assisting a slave to gain freedom. Any person, black or white, who attempts to disrupt the slavocracy or white supremacist hierarchy will come under attack by the white supremacists and their trained stooges.
In the same issue, another writer criticizes Hakim and accuses him of anti-Semitism, writing, “Keith Hakim should name the ‘certain forces’ who were opposed to Dr. Muhammad’s speech on campus. These ‘forces’ are Jews, myself included.”
A scan of the entire column can be viewed here.
The third column, from November 30, 1989, is titled, “Daily editorial staff should feel ashamed.” This column addresses some conflict with the staff of the Minnesota Daily over the previous column Hakim penned.
“The news media prints only the most sensational bits and pieces, never the whole story. This leaves people believing that the Nation of Islam is some kind of black Ku Klux Klan, and they immediately dismiss all of its laudable work,” Hakim writes.
In the same issue, Hakim is criticized by another writer for the newspaper who writes, “To hear Hakim blather, one might think that slavery was invented and employed solely by Western Europeans (ever heard of the Zulus?). One might think that blacks are a very unique group of humans in that they are incapable of practicing racism.”
A scan of both Hakim’s columns and two others criticizing him can be viewed here.
The fourth and final column written by Hakim is the most inflammatory. Published on February 2, 1990 and entitled “Affirmative action does not make up for past injustice,” the article pushes for reparations for slavery and giving black Americans the option of a separate black homeland.
Since no one but the WASP elite really appreciates affirmative action, I have a challenge for all fair-minded middle- and working-class white people: I will urge black people to abandon white-dominated, integration-oriented, give-away programs, if you urge white people to justly compensate black people for 250 years of slavery, 90 years of Jim Crow and 25 years of neo-Jim Crow.
The settlement could be a straight cash transfer for all the black exploitation. This means just compensation for all the labor hours put in by the slaves and just compensation for all the intellectual and artistic property ripped off by all the Elvis Presleys and Pat Boones. It means compensation for all the money ripped off through sharecropping and just compensation owing to all the black athletes of yesterday, such as Jack Jefferson and Joe Louis. It means back payment of the ‘black tax,’ which is the price hike that ghetto merchants and pawnbrokers charge black consumers.
The article proposes a separate country for blacks as well, writing,
Finally, blacks would have the option of choosing their own land base or remaining in the United States. Since black people toiled most diligently in the southeastern section of the United States, this land, quite naturally, would be most suitable. That means Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and Mississippi. Blacks, of course, would not be compelled to move to the black state, and, of course, peaceful whites would not be compelled to move away.
This is a bargain.
Whites would be relieved of the burdens of the black-faced but white-dominated social programs. Blacks would employ themselves, teach their own children the truth and control their own neighborhoods. Black-white interaction would be voluntary instead of compelled. No more busing, no more affirmative action and, best of all, no more white guilt. White people could righteously say they have ‘settled their debts with blacks. Urban blacks, long alienated from society by poverty, forced segregation and media-vilification, would no longer strike fear in whites. Think of it, whites could reclaim their cities — without dispossessing anyone.
Now the liberals may oppose this reparations program because, of course, they justify their existence by championing so-called lost causes.
A full scan of the article can be viewed here and should be read to obtain more details on Hakim’s reparations plans.
This report, by Justin Caruso, was cross-posted by arrangement with the Daily Caller News Foundation.