banner2e top

After the March on Washington: ‘Going Back Home to Agitate’ by Hazel Trice Edney

August 26, 2013

After the March on Washington: ‘Going Back Home to Agitate’
By Hazel Trice Edney

mow-pharoh

Marchers lined the mall from the Lincoln Memorial almost to the Washington Monument. PHOTO: Pharoh Martin/Trice Edney News Wire.

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - More than 100,000 people who convened on the Washington Mall Saturday, rallied, marched and heard dozens of speakers in commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of the 1963 March on Washington. But the clearest message they heard was to unify, go back and fight.

“We’ve come to Washington to commemorate! We’re going back home to agitate! We’ve come to Washington to commemorate! We’re going back home to agitate!” The Rev. Joseph Lowery, a veteran foot soldier for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., led the chant as the thousands echoed the words, preparing to march after the day-long rally. “We want to go back home to complete the unfinished task,” he said.

According to the lengthy list of speakers, those tasks are many. Unlike the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom of 1963, which primarily focused on voting rights and economic injustices, the agenda has grown significantly and diversified. One speaker after the other hit on issues; including voting rights, jobs, immigration, gay rights, women’s rights, gun violence, the death penalty, education, racial profiling, and stand your ground gun laws.

Al Sharpton, keynote speaker and lead march organizer, made it plain as he spoke on three of the key issues, economic justice, voting rights and gun violence:

“Dr. King said America gave Blacks a check that bounced in the bank of justice and was returned marked insufficient funds. Well, we re-deposited the check. But guess what? It bounced again. But, when we looked at the reason this time, it was marked ‘stop payment’”, he said to cheers and applause. “They had the money to bail out banks. They had the money to bail out major corporations. They had the money to give tax benefits to the rich. They had the money for the one percent.”

Throwing a hint to members of Congress seated on the platform, Sharpton encouraged the people to continue marching for jobs, “And if we get tired, we need to sit down in the offices of some of those here.” Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer and Congressional Black Caucus Chairwoman Marcia Fudge had earlier spoken to the crowd. Several other members were also on the platform.

Sharpton recalled how the U. S. Supreme Court recently gutted the pre-clearance mandate of the Voting Rights Act. He warned that a string of new voter identification requirements in states like North Carolina, Texas and Florida appear to have been enacted in response to the election of America’s first Black President Barack Obama.

There was no problem with voter IDs, when “we voted for Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, [George H. W.] Bush, Clinton, and [George W.] Bush,” he said.  “Why when we get to Obama do we need new voter ID laws?”

As the crowd cheered with agreement, Sharpton asked them to press Congress to rewrite the Voting Rights Act so that the significant gains made in the 1960s will be protected.

While dealing strongly with politicians, Sharpton also made it clear that the Black community is not without blame for some of its conditions. He encouraged the youth to respect one another, to respect women and noted how youth are shooting and killing each other for no reason.

“We’ve got some house cleaning to do. And as we clean up our house, we’ll be able to clean up America,” he said.

Each issue hit home with the crowd that stretched from the Lincoln Memorial, past the Tidal Basin and almost to the Washington Monument. Both youth and veteran marchers had hauled signs and placards to the mall, prepared to make their statements. Many T-shirts, banners and signs bore the likeness of Trayvon Martin, the unarmed Florida teen who was shot and killed last year after being profiled by now acquitted George Zimmerman.

Trayvon’s mother, Sybrina Fulton, spoke briefly and guardedly from her heart: “As I said before, Trayvon Martin was my son. But, he wasn’t just my son. He’s all of our son and we have to fight for our children,” she said. “It is very important that we not forget that we make sure we are mindful of what’s going on with the laws and remember that God is in control.”

The historic nature of the march and the agenda ahead was especially apparent as Martin Luther King III spoke and the Rev. Bernice King gave the closing prayer. They both recalled their father’s legacy.

“I am humbled by the heavy hand of history. I, like you, continue to feel his presence. I, like you, continue to hear his voice crying out in the wilderness,” he said. “This is not the time for a nostalgic commemoration; nor is it the time for self-congratulatory celebration. The task is not done. The journey is not complete. We can and we must do more.”

King III pointed to stats that underscore America’s economic inequalities that remain. “With 12 percent unemployment rates in the African-American community and 38 percent of all the children of color in this country we know that the dream is far from being realized.”

Rev. Bernice prayed fervently, “We thank you God that the Spirit that inspired those fifty years ago is inspiring us today…We are determined to continue the struggle.”

She continued, “We pray even now Lord God that you would bind us together like never before, regardless of our backgrounds; even regardless of our differences, Father God, give us the strength and the courage and the humility to transcend those differences, Father, that we might be able to join together as a freedom force to continue to move this nation and this world toward creating the beloved community and ultimately the kingdom of God.”

U. S. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who was arrested 40 times during the civil rights movement and was the only person on the platform who also spoke in 1963, appeared to take up where he left off 50 years ago.

“We cannot give up! We cannot give up! We cannot give in! I am not going to stand by and let the Supreme Court take the right to vote!..I’m not tired; I’m not weary!” he declared. “The vote is the most powerful non-violent tool we have in society. Use it! You must get out there and push and pull and make America what America should be!”

Moguldom Media Creates Website to Encourage Business Relationships in Africa

Moguldom Media Creates Website to Encourage Business Relationships in Africa

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from Target Market News

(TriceEdneyWire.com) Moguldom Media Group, which owns popular black sites Bossip and MadameNoire, announced the launch of AFKInsider.com a website for consumers and business professionals in Africa as well as investors and others interested in doing business in fast-growing African markets.

The first property in Moguldom's new Emerging Markets Division, AFK Insider will also develop subscription web apps that help entrepreneurs and investors reduce the complexity of entering and doing business in African markets. As Moguldom continues to launch additional brands around African travel and entertainment, the company aims to become the leading digital content platform across the continent of Africa in the next three years.

Considered the world's fastest-growing continent, Africa offers tremendous opportunities for business professionals. A recent report by the African Development Bank (AfDB) found that Africa's middle class has tripled to more than 310 million people over the past 30 years. AfDB President Donald Kaberuka projects economic growth of 6.6 percent on average this year for Sub-Saharan Africa.

Meanwhile, household spending in Africa is projected to increase from $860 billion in 2008 to $1.4 trillion in 2020, according to a report by McKinsey. PwC reports that the number of mobile telephone subscriptions in Africa has risen from 16 million in 2000 to more than 500 million today, while consumer spending will almost double in the next ten years.

In launching a new African economic campaign called "Doing Business in Africa" (DBIA), U.S. President Barack Obama said, "Many American entrepreneurs and business leaders are unaware of the tremendous trade and investment prospects in sub-Saharan Africa."

Despite this vast potential, there are few high-quality resources for people seeking to do business in Africa. AFK Insider will meet this need with original and aggregated daily news, proprietary reports, and features about the business climate and developments in Africa. Published in English, French, and Portuguese, the website is intended for businesspeople within Africa; investors, professionals, and entrepreneurs around the world who already do business in Africa; and others who are interested in learning more about the growing opportunities there.

AFK Insider will be supported by a Moguldom office that was established in Johannesburg, South Africa this month. South Africa has been ranked as the leading emerging economy in Africa and among the top 15 worldwide according to the Emerging Markets Opportunity Index created by international advisory firm Grant Thornton.

In addition to providing content, AFK Insider engineers will develop web applications to help entrepreneurs and professionals reduce the complexity of entering and doing business in various African markets. These premium tools will be available on a subscription basis.

"We see ourselves as a first mover in Africa digital media and are well positioned for leadership," said Jamarlin Martin, Chairman and CEO at Moguldom Media Group. "There has been no premiere resource in the U.S. that delivers information to people who want to do business in Africa. AFK Insider will be a vital resource not only for consumers and business professionals in Africa, but also for those interested in Africa business news and doing business in this exciting, fast-growing region."

The new Moguldom Emerging Markets Division is central to the company's strategy to transition to a global digital media company. The division will launch additional digital brands in entertainment and travel targeting Sub-Saharan Africa, including AFK Travel, a resource for travelers interested in exploring and experiencing premier locations in Africa to search for, organize and book luxury accommodations in the continent.

In addition to meeting the needs of audiences, the division will provide creative services and advertising opportunities that allow brands to tap into the African market and emerging markets around the world. According to Nielsen's Global AdView Pulse 2012 report, advertising in the emerging markets of the Middle East and Africa rose more than 30 percent last year.

More info available at www.afkinsider.com.         

Be an Advance Guard for Jobs by William Spriggs

August 25, 2013

Be an Advance Guard for Jobs
By William Spriggs

billspriggs

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - In August 1963, as was the case 100 years earlier when the cemetery for the heroes of Gettysburg was dedicated, many speeches were delivered; but one stood out as a galvanizing moment to redefine and repurpose a movement. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, delivered in November 1863, clearly defined the issue of the Civil War to be whether states' rights could trample the rights of anyone. Similarly, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s speech came to define the civil rights movement of a century later.

It has come to be interpreted as a call for a colorblind society, instead of a call to end racial injustice. His vision was more powerful than the sanguine, "not judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character," interpretation that has seen right-wing conservatives quoting Dr. King's speech to justify racial disparities; in the same way that tea party members embrace Lincoln's "government of the people," to somehow mean no government at all.

The 1963 march was the March for Jobs and Freedom. Dr. King, who would become a strong champion for reforming America's economic system so it worked to advance people-not crush them in poverty as sacrifices for progress-did not use the word "jobs" that day or make mention of the millions of Americans who were unemployed. Dr. King's body of work, his push to end poverty in America, is clearly part of his legacy. He stands as a drum major for justice, not just racial justice but economic justice. But, his "I Have a Dream" speech was an articulation of how the civil rights movement was a fulfillment of the founding principles of America in line with the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Gettysburg Address. It clearly argued that racial injustice was so incompatible with American ideals that it could not be defended.

But, the march was a March for Jobs and Freedom. The march was the dream of A. Philip Randolph, who was the senior statesmen of the major civil rights leaders. In 1963, Randolph was 74 years old, King was 34, and the only living major speaker of the day is Rep. John Lewis, then the head of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, who was 23. Randolph, the president of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, was a union president and saw economic rights as inseparable from civil rights. And so it was Randolph who wanted the march to be a march for jobs.

As the leader of the march, Randolph opened the ceremonies at the Lincoln Memorial and was the master of ceremonies for the day of speeches. His characterization of the march was, "we are the advanced guard of a massive, moral revolution for jobs and freedom." While acknowledging racial injustice, he said, "We want all public accommodations open to all citizens, but those accommodations will mean little to those who cannot afford to use them."

And most importantly, he pointed out that equal opportunity to jobs means nothing if we have an economic system that is destroying jobs. A simple yardstick would suggest that the civil rights changes since the march have exceeded what could have been imagined. In 1963, very few blacks were registered to vote, there were no Black members of Congress from the South and few local elected officials. Yet, today, both John Lewis and one of Dr. King's lieutenants, Andrew Young, have served as members of Congress representing Atlanta, and there are Black members of Congress from every Southern state. In 1963, mostly limited to Historically Black Colleges and Universities, only about 4 percent of the Black population had college degrees; today about 21 percent of African-Americans have a college degree and attend every flagship public university in the South. But, the March for Jobs and Freedom was launched when the Black unemployment rate stood at 10.9 percent, today it stands at 12.6 percent.

The march did usher in many economic changes. The Civil Rights Act that passed the following year in 1964 made employment discrimination illegal, ending practices of major newspapers, like The Washington Post, posting help wanted ads for "nurse (practical) white, for small nursing home." This was followed by President Johnson issuing Executive Order 11246, requiring firms contracting with the federal government to take affirmative actions to ensure compliance with the Civil Rights Act in their hiring. And, the call to raise the minimum wage was answered with an eventual boost to $1.60 an hour in 1968-the equivalence of $10.70 today, and the minimum wage's highest value. The minimum wage coverage was extended to state and local government workers, boosting the earnings of Black workers who gained entry to low-wage public-sector employment.

The result was that the median earnings of black men rose from below poverty for a family of three at $16,051 in 1963 to a peak of $23,135 in 1973, way above the poverty level. And, the black unemployment rate fell to 6.4 percent in 1969. So, not surprisingly, the poverty rate for black children fell from 65.6 percent in 1965 to 39.6 percent in 1969. In 2010, 39 percent of Black children lived in poverty, the median income of Black men stood at $23,475 in 2011, and today the unemployment rate for Black men is at 12.5 percent.

Today, the challenge remains for civil rights to fight against the mass incarceration of black men, protect the Voting Rights Act from activist Supreme Court judges on the right and prevent vigilante acts coded into "Stand Your Ground" laws that killed Trayvon Martin. So, let us hope that this current generation, armed with social media, can outperform the generation of typewriters and index cards in putting hundreds of thousands into a march to redeem the dream in Dr. King's speech to end racial injustice.

Thanks to the successes of the 1963 march, today's young people will not be asked to march in the middle of the week as was the case in 1963. Afraid of a large gathering of "protesters," the march organizers were forced to hold the march on a Wednesday to keep the crowd down and to agree that the marchers would all leave Washington by sundown. So, holding the march on a Saturday, and with the freedom to stretch the message longer than "sun up to sundown," this generation has overcome those barriers of the past.

But, let us also hope that this generation will see that they must again mount a campaign for jobs. If more than 250,000 Americans marched on Washington when the unemployment rate was 5.7 percent demanding full employment policies are at the center of economic policy, how will this generation respond? If more than 250,000 Americans marched on Washington demanding a raise in the minimum wage when its value was $9.54, how will this generation respond?

To encourage this generation, the AFL-CIO sponsored a scholarship competition to grant 60 scholarships to young people willing to commit themselves to recommit America to the demands of the 1963 March for Jobs and Freedom. Each of the students will be receiving a one-time $5,000 scholarship to help them afford college this fall. The 150th freshman class of Howard University will be at the march this Saturday. So, some young people are committed to respond.

Will our political leadership respond? Will it pass a new Civil Rights Act? Will it pass a Full Employment Act? Will it raise the minimum wage?

Follow Spriggs on Twitter: @WSpriggs.

Contact: Amaya Smith-Tune Acting Director, Media Outreach AFL-CIO 202-637-5142.

Dr. King Asked Kennedy for Second Emancipation: Article VII of an 11-part series on race in America - Past and Present

August 25, 2013

Article VII of an 11-part series on race in America - Past and Present

Dr. King Asked Kennedy for Second Emancipation

king-kennedy photo

One hundred years after Lincoln signed the Proclamation, Martin Luther King Jr. tried unsuccessfully to get President John F. Kennedy to issue a second one. That failure changed the course of history.

taylor branch 2
Taylor Branch

By Taylor Branch and Haley Sweetland Edwards

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - In October 1961, Martin Luther King Jr. and President John F. Kennedy took an after-lunch stroll through the elegant hallways of the White House residence. Their meeting that day was not official: it was not in the White House's appointment book, and King had not been formally invited to discuss any sort of business. It was instead a guarded and rather stilted introduction for leaders of professed goodwill, in a political climate that remained extremely sensitive about race.

When the men passed the Lincoln Bedroom on their tour, King noticed the Emancipation Proclamation framed on the wall, and took the opportunity to raise, ever so delicately, the pressing issue of civil rights. King suggested something radical: a second Emancipation Proclamation, a proposal that would become the centerpiece of King's lobbying campaign for the next year.

Taylor Branch, the Pulitzer Prize-winning civil rights scholar and biographer of King, recently sat down with Washington Monthly editor Haley Sweetland Edwards and explained this idea, what happened next, and how Kennedy's choice on the matter altered King's thinking and the course of the civil rights movement.

How did the off-the-record meeting between King and Kennedy come about that October evening?

The administration had summoned King to Washington for a meeting that day at the Justice Department, where officials insisted that one of his advisers was a dangerous communist subversive and that King had to get rid of him. King was still shaken by the demand when he went into the residence, not the West Wing, for his private meeting with the President. An appointment with the President would have been too controversial-King was still a radioactive figure then. He had gone to jail in the South; he'd been indicted and tried for violating segregation laws embedded in the constitutions of the southern states; and he'd been denounced by the same governors who'd supported the President. King's White House visit was deliberately made intimate but hidden, and social. He was led upstairs to the residence for a private luncheon with President Kennedy and Jackie.

Jackie's presence was a signal to King that he couldn't say anything political that would ruin the moment-nothing about segregation or the sit-ins or the Freedom Rides that shook the country that year. They talked politely about their educations in Boston, their children, and that sort of thing.

Why, of all things, did King suggest a second Emancipation Proclamation?

When they were walking down the hallway, King saw the Emancipation Proclamation hanging on the wall in the Lincoln Bedroom. It provided an excuse for him to bring up politics in a positive way-to talk about the historic glow of Lincoln's decision. King suggested that perhaps the president would consider issuing a second Emancipation Proclamation for January of 1963, on the 100th anniversary of the first one. Just as Lincoln had used an executive order to abolish slavery in the Southern states, King said, Kennedy could outlaw segregation.

King loved the idea of a second Emancipation Proclamation. He thought it would be easier for Kennedy than passing legislation-southerners had strangled every significant civil rights proposal in Congress for a century. At the same time, King hoped for an initiative by the president to make things easier for a struggling civil rights movement. King had not joined the Freedom Rides himself, nor yet accepted the personal sacrifice of a determined campaign to end segregation. He deeply hoped that if the president issued an executive order, there could be an easy way out for both of them.

What happened after that conversation outside the Lincoln Bedroom?

For the next six months, King and his lawyers drafted a second Emancipation Proclamation in Kennedy's name. Then in May of 1962, when King was in Washington for a meeting to launch his Gandhi Society for Human Rights, he delivered a copy to the White House personally. It was a very fancy draft, bound in leather for the president, with copies for all the lower-level officials involved in civil rights. The cover letter said, "We ask that you proclaim all segregation statutes of all southern states to be contrary to the constitution, and that the full powers of your office be employed to void their enforcement." The idea was to get the president to issue this second executive order on September 22, 1962-the hundredth anniversary of Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, issued after the Civil War battle of Antietam.

How did Kennedy respond?

He didn't. Not even by private letter. A while later, when King received an invitation to a White House luncheon for the archbishop of Cyprus, he declined. The standoff turned into an understated duel of manners. Kennedy was trying to keep things social, and King, by turning down the luncheon, was trying to signal that he could not be bought off. He had very real business that required attention.

For Kennedy, addressing segregation was a hornet's nest. Because he knew that no Democrat could hope to be elected without the support of the solid South, it was never quite the right moment to become politically exposed on the issue of segregation.

During his 1960 presidential campaign, Kennedy had promised action to reduce segregation wherever the powers of the federal government reached. He'd said he could end segregation in federally subsidized public housing "with the stroke of a pen" - in other words, without getting it through Congress. Once in office, however, he stalled. Supporters of civil rights actually mailed thousands of pens to the White House in a publicity campaign with a rare touch of humor, saying the president must have misplaced his pen.

Meanwhile, excruciating dramas over segregation continued after the Freedom Rides in the summer of '61, which Kennedy said were embarrassing the United States. When Kennedy met with Premier Krushchev in Vienna, he said he had to endure criticism-from the Soviets, of all people, who had no freedom!-that America could not be free, judging by the way it treated its Black citizens. By September of 1962, it still took a lethal riot and a year's occupation by 20,000 U.S. soldiers to secure the token integration of Ole Miss by its first Black student, James Meredith.

So the September anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation came and went without note from the White House?

This was a big disappointment to King, and a shock to King's allies in Congress. King actually got them to write a letter saying that they'd understood the president was going to come to an event on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on September 22. Their fallback plan was to goad the White House into action on January 1, 1963, the 100th anniversary of the New Year's Day on which the Emancipation Proclamation went into effect.

Toward that end, after months of lobbying, King delivered another draft of the second Emancipation Proclamation to the White House on December 17, 1962. It was much shorter. By this point, he'd backtracked on asking the president to proclaim all the segregation laws null. Instead, this draft called only for the nation to celebrate the spirit and example of the Emancipation Proclamation throughout 1963, invoking Lincoln's legacy behind President Kennedy.

How did Kennedy react to that draft?

It bounced around the White House for a bit-but remember, this was December '62. Kennedy had just weathered the global threat of the Cuban Missile Crisis, and his administration was preoccupied with efforts to free the Bay of Pigs prisoners still in Cuba. He just didn't respond to the draft proclamation, and missed the January 1 deadline, too.

After that, the White House announced a plan to host a social event for Lincoln's birthday. From Kennedy's point of view, it was a good solution-he could avoid the risk of issuing an executive order in a way that emphasized how much the emancipation tradition belonged to Republicans, not Democrats. He used Lincoln's birthday as the occasion to invite many Black dignitaries into the White House, which had been mostly off-limits except in token ways. The White House endured a great deal of negative press for inviting Sammy Davis Jr., who had a White wife. The idea of a mixed-race couple in the White House was still very controversial in 1963-which in itself is a pretty good sign of how blighted and benighted people were about race.

Did King go to the White House event for Lincoln's birthday?

No. When Kennedy blew the New Year's Day anniversary, King realized he could no longer count on Kennedy to take leadership on civil rights. Nor could he bear any longer to let young people-that is, college students, the Freedom Riders, the ones going to sit-ins and to jail-bear the whole burden of raising the issue of segregation. King was worried he was losing his window in history. He believed every movement was about political timing: you only get so much capital to spend, you only get so many chances. He thought the issue of desegregation was beginning to recede. He said southerners were rallying to the defense of segregation more strongly than supporters of the Brown [vs. Board of Education] decision were rallying to freedom. King felt they needed to change the climate of public opinion in their favor-and that meant taking a risk.

It was after Kennedy blew this second deadline that King realized he had nothing left to wait for. He had to "go for broke," as he called it, and head down to Birmingham, Alabama, which was considered the toughest bastion of racism in the South. It's hard for people to understand what a big leap that was for him, but one way of understanding it is that he didn't tell his own father, or the board of his protest group, that he was going. He didn't want them to try to stop him.

Would it be fair to say that Kennedy's failure to embrace the second Emancipation Proclamation catalyzed a turning point in the civil rights movement?

King knew that Lincoln had issued the original Emancipation Proclamation in the middle of a war with lots of people dying. I think he realized that in order to get the president, or anyone, to act, what he had to do was go to Birmingham and essentially recreate those conditions-not a full-fledged civil war, but something that dramatized the moral imperative of the segregation issue in America.

In the end, King authorized not only high school students, but also elementary school students as young as 6 years old, to participate in a huge wave of demonstrations beginning May 2. That's when Birmingham brought out the dogs and fire hoses and shocked the world. That's when the issue of segregation really broke through people's emotional barriers, not only in the United States but around the world. Up until that point, people had always found ways to evade the problem, to say it was someone else's responsibility or that time would solve the problem. King had always known on some level that he'd have to join the students in the street, but like all of us who are human, he looked for an easier way until every door was closed and his conscience wouldn't let him avoid it anymore.

Did Kennedy miss a major moral opportunity to do the right thing?

It's historically accurate to say that Kennedy was not the vanguard figure in civil rights that popular history makes him out to be. It's also true, however, that his fears were probably justified. Had he issued an executive order against segregation through a second Emancipation Proclamation, it probably would have weakened his administration without accomplishing anything. The southern states would have declared it illegal. They would have said he couldn't declare a war measure since there wasn't a war going on. And that would have made Kennedy look ineffectual, reduced his prestige, and perhaps cost him the next election. And then the next president would be even less likely to take on the entrenched power of the southern states. So unless you expect your political leaders to give up the prospect of holding office, you have to acknowledge that he had pretty good reason not to act on a second Emancipation Proclamation.
Kennedy did finally go on television and propose a civil rights bill in June of 1963, but by that time demonstrations of sympathy for what had happened in Birmingham had broken out in hundreds of cities across the country. At that point, Kennedy didn't have any choice but to calm the fires of protest before they consumed his government.

King succeeded in getting Kennedy to act, just not in the way he'd intended.

People are always tempted to say that presidents and leaders should supply all the initiative, but in fact what worked in the civil rights movement was the combination of an aroused citizenry, which claimed rights and changed the political mood, and responsive national leaders. President Johnson later said that if, at the right time, King and the priests and ministers who were risking their lives down in Selma changed the political climate enough, then I can and will propose the voting rights bill. And he did. And that was really the pinnacle of cooperation between citizens taking responsibility for their government and government leaders responding to a political climate-a political climate created by the citizens themselves.
Taylor Branch and Haley Sweetland Edwards collaborated on this article. Branch is a Pulitzer Prize-winning author who first wrote for the Washington Monthly in 1969. His new book, "The King Years: Historic Moments in the Civil Rights Movement," is being published in January 2013. Haley Sweetland Edwards is an editor of the Washington Monthly. This article, the seventh of an 11-part series on race, is sponsored by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation and was originally published by the Washington Monthly Magazine.

Millionaires Abound in Major African Cities, a Study Finds

August 25, 2013

Millionaires Abound in Major African Cities, a Study Finds

 

johannesburg

Johannesburg


Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from GIN


(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Johannesburg has the top number of millionaires on the African continent with some 23,400 very rich people, according to a newly released survey of the wealthy.

 

Cairo, Lagos and Cape Town are the cities with the next largest concentrations of high-net-worth individuals with 12,300, 9,800 and 9,000 respectively, according to the New World Wealth survey carried out early this year.

 

Nairobi rounds out the top five cities with 5,000 super-wealthy individuals. The Kenyan capital was also only second to Accra in having the fastest growing rate of the high net worth group.

 

The next five cities in order are Durban, Casablanca, Pretoria, Luanda and Algiers, according to the survey.

 

A concentration of super-rich individuals creates a demand for luxury goods, prime properties, art and services like wealth management and private banking – indices to investors of economic growth.

 

South Africa, Egypt, Nigeria and Kenya are the highest ranking African countries, with 48,800, 23,000, 15,900 and 8,400 millionaires respectively.

 

Rising incomes have invited greater investment in broadband, wireless and other communications platforms that enable internet access, cell phones and social media. Facebook now has a skyrocketing presence in Africa. According to ICTworks, the fastest growing nations in terms of Facebook users are Ghana, Kenya, South Africa, Nigeria and Egypt. As of December 2011, there were more than 37 million Facebook users in Africa.

 

But at a recent U.N. conference, youth activists from Sierra Leone and Uganda noted the immense obstacles they still face due to the widening gap between the haves and the have nots. Traveling to Internet cafés in urban areas is expensive for rural youth and unsafe for young women at night. The majority of primary and secondary schools are not yet wired. In some cases projects and funds are used for political gain and personal favors. Even at university level, student access might be limited to 1-2 hours per week at a computer lab, meaning almost everything is done on paper.

X