Federal Reserve Board: H.2 Release for Week Ending November 21, 2015; A Brief Comment on Diversity Practices of the Board

The Federal Reserve Board (Board) publishes a weekly digest of its activities on its website. The digest is called the H.2 Release and is published every Thursday. The release for the week ending November 21, 2015, is below.

H.2 Release–Actions of the Board, Its Staff, and the Federal Reserve Banks; Applications and Reports Received

Category Action Taken
Bank Holding Companies Community Bank System, Inc., DeWitt, New York — to acquire Oneida Financial Corp., Oneida, and thereby indirectly acquire Oneida Savings Bank and State Bank of Chittenango, Chittenango.

-Approved, November 17, 2015











Monetary and Financial Policy Term Deposit Facility — floating-rate offering of seven-day term deposits with an early withdrawal feature, same-day settlement, and a maximum tender amount of $5 billion on December 3, 2015.

-Announced, November 19, 2015



Regulations and Policies Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) — publication for comment of a proposed rule to implement public disclosure requirements for depository institution holding companies and nonbank financial companies subject to the LCR requirements, and extension of compliance period for companies newly subject to the modified LCR rule.

-Approved, November 13, 2015




Enforcement BNP Paribas S.A. (BNP), Paris, France — request to select K2 Intelligence as an independent consultant to perform certain requirements under the June 30, 2014, enforcement action against BNP.

-Approved, November 20, 2015


Independent Foreclosure Review Payment Agreement — redistribution plan for unclaimed funds under the agreement to eligible borrowers who have cashed or deposited checks.

-Approved, November 18, 2015


Jones Bancshares, L.P., Waycross, Georgia, and PrimeSouth Bancshares, Inc. — written agreement issued July 12, 2011, terminated November 13, 2015.

-Announced, November 19, 2015


Regent Bancorp, Inc., Davie, Florida — written agreement issued April 25, 2011, terminated November 10, 2015.

-Announced, November 19, 2015





Separately, the Board publishes a confounding table for its EEO-1 report and purports to be an inclusive and diverse workforce. However, the results of the report by Representative Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) (Waters report) and of the Board’s own Inspector General, shows that the current Board practices have exclusive and non-diverse outcomes.

[Regarding the Board’s EEO-1 report–such a confusing list of numbers and percentages. If monetary policy was conducted in such a cavalier and obscure fashion (as it does for diversity and inclusion programs), the Board would be asked to resign.]

The present director of the Board’s Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, Sheila Clark, has evidenced that the Board itself has a self-perception that it is separate from the country in civil rights matters, for example, in the hiring black employees, and the retention those few black persons that are hired. [The Waters report (page 12) showed that across all of the federal financial regulatory agencies, including the Board, blacks received lower ratings.] The Board’s Chief Operating Officer, Don Hammond, is yet another huge obstacle to progress.


Sheila Clark’s letter to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (printed in the Auerbach book, page 123).


The Board’s separate but equal worldview is totally unacceptable in 2015; change is absolutely necessary–not simply diversity scorecards (???), an extremely facile and passive response (considering the Board’s 18+ year legal fight in Artis v. Greenspan, an employment discrimination case). The Board should also update its equal employment opportunity regulations to ensure that current-day employment discrimination rules are reflected in those regulations.



Federal Reserve Board: H.2 Release for Week Ending November 7, 2015; Background on the Board’s OMWI Program

The Federal Reserve Board (Board) publishes a weekly digest of its activities on its website. The digest is called the H.2 Release and is published every Thursday. The release for the week ending November 7, 2015, is below.

H.2 Release–Actions of the Board, Its Staff, and the Federal Reserve Banks; Applications and Reports Received

Category Action Taken
Testimony and Statements Supervision and Regulation — statement by Chair Yellen before the House Committee on Financial Services on the Federal Reserve’s regulation and supervision of financial institutions.

-Published, November 4, 2015

Bank Holding Companies M&T Bank Corporation, Buffalo, New York — commenter’s request for reconsideration of the Board’s approval of the proposal by M&T Bank Corporation to acquire Hudson City Bancorp, Inc., Paramus, New Jersey.

-Denied, November 4, 2015

Forms Forms — final Board review to extend without revision the recordkeeping and disclosure requirements associated with the regulations implementing the Fair Credit Reporting Act (Regulation V).

-Approved, November 2, 2015

Forms — initial Board review to implement the Application for Membership for the Community Advisory Council (FR 1401).

-Proposed, November 2, 2015

Reserve Bank Operations Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis — appointment of Neel T. Kashkari as president, effective January 1, 2016.

-Approved, October 22, 2015


Reserve Bank Services Federal Reserve Priced Services — 2016 private sector adjustment factor and fee schedules for priced services and electronic access.

-Approved, November 2, 2015

Enforcement Deutsche Bank, AG, Frankfurt, Germany — issuance of a consent cease and desist order and assessment of a civil money penalty.

-Approved, November 2, 2015

Goldman, Sachs & Co., New York, New York — issuance of a consent order of prohibition against Rohit Bansal, a former institution-affiliated party.

-Announced, November 5, 2015

Separately, last week, Representative Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and other Congressional Democrats issued a report (Waters Report) about diversity within the federal financial regulatory agencies. The executive summary for the report indicated that the Board’s director for the Office of Minority and Women Inclusion (at the time of this writing, the Board calls the office, the Office of Diversity and Inclusion (or ODI)) is Ms. Sheila Clark.

[Quote from Rev. Thomas Merton’ s book, “Seeds of Destruction.” (Pope Francis mentioned Rev. Merton during his remarks before a joint session of Congress.)–

But the [civil rights] laws have been framed in a way that in every case their execution has depended on the good will of white society, and the white man has not failed, when left to himself, to block, obstruct, or simply forget the necessary action without which the rights of the Negro cannot be engaged in fact. (Page 19).


Some pertinent background facts:

January 11, 2011: Artis v Greenspan–The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, issued a decision against the Board, remanding the case to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

January 11, 2011: The Board announced that it had created offices of diversity and inclusion for the Board and the Federal Reserve Banks. The director of the Board’s office was named–Ms. Sheila Clark.

Ms. Sheila Clark–

  • See a Huffington Post article by Professor Robert D. Auerbach, author of “Deception and Abuse at the Fed: Henry B. Gonzalez Battles Alan Greenspan’s Bank,” in which he stated (reference (about letter) is located at page 123 of his book)–
    • “The Fed Press Release states that Sheila Clark will be one of the heads of the “diversity and inclusion offices” at the Board. I have a copy of a letter sent by her (10/27/1995) stating that “while the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System has taken the position that [missing ‘it”] is not subject to the [C]ivil [R]ights Act of 1964, as amended, and its associated executive orders and regulations, it subscribes fully to their basic goals and spirit.” Yet, the Federal government’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) had told Greenspan emphatically as early as 1989 that the Commission’s position was that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act applied fully to the Federal Reserve.”
Sheila Clark's letter to the EEOC (printed in the Aurebach book, page 123).
Sheila Clark’s letter to the EEOC (printed in the Auerbach book, page 123).

In addition, the executive summary of the Waters Report (page 5) stated the following about the Board:

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors (“FRB”)

OMWI Director–Sheila Clark

The Federal Reserve Board is the central bank of the United States, and in addition to working to provide a safer, more stable and flexible monetary system, it also regulates bank holding companies, and the largest, most complex non-bank financial institutions in the country.

In racial, ethnic and gender categories, its workforce diversity was found to exceed the diversity found within the civilian labor force.

The FRB has the most diverse general workforce and the largest percentage of women employees in senior management.

Yet, notably the FRB OIG determined that the diversity data collected was not validated against the agency’s employee electronic human resources records which undermines the integrity of the agency’s diversity efforts and its strong empirical diversity data.

The FRB does not have a finalized set of diversity and inclusion standards as required under the Dodd-Frank Act.

Federal Reserve Board, Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, Reports to Congress

(Preface language for report submitted in 2015.) “Pursuant to section 342(e) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), the Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI) of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System must submit an annual report to the Congress outlining the activities, successes, and challenges of the office. This is the office’s report for calendar year 2014. Sheila Clark serves as the director of ODI.”

Federal Reserve Board: H.2 Release for Week Ending October 31, 2015; Rep. Maxine Waters Issues Report on Diversity at Fed. Financial Agencies, Incl. the Board

The Federal Reserve Board (Board) publishes a weekly digest of its activities on its website. The digest is called the H.2 Release and is published every Thursday. The release for the week ending October 31, 2015, is below.

H.2 Release–Actions of the Board, Its Staff, and the Federal Reserve Banks; Applications and Reports Received

Category Action Taken
Regulations and Policies Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities — (1) interagency final rule to establish minimum margin and capital requirements for swaps and security-based swaps that are not cleared through a clearinghouse, in accordance with the Dodd-Frank Act, and (2) request for comment on interim final rule to exempt from margin requirements certain non-cleared swaps, such as those used for hedging purposes by commercial end-user counterparties.

-Approved, October 30, 2015

Regulations Q and YY — publication for comment of proposed rule to require U.S. global systemically important banking organizations and the U.S. operations of systemically important foreign banks to meet a new long-term debt requirement and a new total loss-absorbing capacity requirement.

-Approved, October 30, 2015

In addition, on November 5, 2015, the Board permanently barred Mr. Rohit Bansal, former investment banker at Goldman Sachs & Co. from participating in the banking industry.


Separately, and also on November 5, 2015, Representative Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Financial Services, and the Tri-Caucus, issued a report, “The Dodd-Frank Act Five Years Later: Diversity in the Financial Services Agencies.” In addition, the Committee Democrats issued a letter, with the report, to the agency heads, requesting a response by December 7, 2015.

Notably, but sadly unsurprisingly, the report found that across the federal financial agencies, black/African American employees, overall, received lower performance management scores than white employees (see graphs on page 12 of the report, especially the one for the Board at the bottom of the page).

In addition, the report had specific comments for each agency. I will quote the portion of the report relating to the Board below.

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors (FRB)

Empirically, the FRB workforce was among the most diverse of all the Agencies, both generally and with respect to the senior management. In racial, ethnic, and gender categories, its workforce diversity was found to exceed the CLF. However, the OIG found several areas where the FRB has failed to adhere to statutory requirements.

Procedurally, the FRB did not follow the statutory instructions to name the newly-established diversity office, “the Office of Minority and Women Inclusion,” and instead opted to call it the “Office of Diversity and Inclusion” (“OD&I”).

Substantively, the OIG also recommended that the OD&I Director ensure that No-FEAR Act training is offered on a regular basis, is tailored to the FRB, and includes EEO and diversity and inclusion topics in accordance with the Board’s No-FEAR Act Written Training Plan.[48. Federal Reserve Board, Office of Inspector General, THE BOARD CAN ENHANCE ITS DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION EFFORTS, (2015-MO-B006, Mar. 31, 2015), 54.] Further, the OIG suggested that such trainings be updated as necessary to address any deficiencies identified, and that attendance records be retained.[49. Id.] The OIG noted that the EEOC’s MD-715 “guidance advocates that all employees receive information about the EEO program through training on the EEO process and the protections afforded to employees, related policy statements, and reasonable accommodation procedures.”[50. Id. at 53.] Such diversity and inclusion training is critical to the proper functioning of the human resources office within the agency. Notably, the OIG found that the “data collected [for the OD&I’s MD-715 processes] were not validated against the employee electronic records stored in HR” during the audit period from FY 2011 through FY 2013. The lack of controls for diversity data found at the FRB by the OIG undermines the integrity of the agency’s diversity and inclusion programs, and may in fact be contrary to required EEOC reporting regulations.

Ultimately, the FRB’s implementation of the Section 342 requirements suggests to the Committee staff a tendency toward maintaining the status-quo with respect to workforce diversity efforts. “Although the FRB established the OD&I to include an OMWI function in response to the Dodd-Frank Act requirements, according to the OD&I official, the OD&I has not significantly modified its approach because these activities were already being covered prior to the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act.”[51. Id. at 55.] Also, like several other agencies, as of the date of the OIG’s report, the OD&I had not finalized a formal set of diversity and inclusion standards, as required by Section 342.

[Author’s note: This blog covered some parts of these audit reports from the Inspectors General, especially that for the Board.]

Federal Financial Agency Report Number Internet Link Comment
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Audit report 2015-MO-C-002 http://oig.federalreserve.gov/reports/cfpb-diversity-inclusion-mar2015.pdf American Banker article about racial disparities of CFPB staff evaluations.
Department of the Treasury, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency OIG-15-017 http://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/ig/Audit%20Reports%20and%20Testimonies/OIG-15-017.pdf
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Eval-15-001 http://www.fdicoig.gov/reports15/15-001EV.pdf
Federal Housing Finance Agency EVL-2015-003 http://fhfaoig.gov/Content/Files/EVL-2015-003.pdf
Federal Reserve Board Audit report 2015-MO-B-006 http://oig.federalreserve.gov/reports/board-diversity-inclusion-mar2015.pdf What is left out of the report is significant: Artis v. Bernanke (now Yellen). Also 12 U.S.C. 244 needs Congressional attention to ensure that Title 5 of the U.S. Code applies to the Board; the Board’s record-keeping on, and reporting of, its internal management is lax.
National Credit Union Administration OIG-14-09 http://www.ncua.gov/about/Leadership/CO/OIG/Documents/OIG201409EqualOpportunityDiversity.pdf Click for blog post on this report
Securities and Exchange Commission 528 http://www.sec.gov/oig/reportspubs/528.pdf Report is thorough, thoughtful, and well done.

Futility of “Colorblindness”: Nonviolent Spring Valley High School (South Carolina) Discipline Issue “Resolved” with Violence by a Police Officer

[Update 10-28-2015: The student thrown down is a grieving person; she has an estranged mother,and now she is in foster care. This is simply an extremely sad case, with multiple levels of failure.]

The placement of police officers in schools to use the criminal justice system to resolve issues of nonviolent school discipline issues must end. It affects students by prematurely blocking them from the society with criminal records. It allows police tactics to replace the educational purpose of the schools, both in teaching academic subjects as well as helping students learn to self-manage their emotions and actions. Police officers are trained to handle threats and serious, violent crimes, not nonviolent student disciplinary issues, like using cellphones in class, backtalk, or other displays of minor, but irritating, teenage disobedience.

[Author’s note: For further background information about police officers (also referred as school resource officers) in educational institutions, see Raymond, Barbara, “Assigning Police Officers to Schools.”]

In Spring Valley High School in South Carolina, an alleged minor rule infraction was escalated to a criminal justice issue by the teacher and ultimately the high school’s administrator, subjecting the student to violence for an issue that well could have waited until the class ended to discuss with cool heads.

Instead of that, students were taught an alternative lesson: absolute compliance with authority is expected or expect the violent powers of the state to be used against you. In addition, your physical safety matters not one iota to us if you block us in any way. To the black students–you are not safe at all; we do not respect you as a human being but rather as a thing to be dominated and controlled.

Virginia Slave Law, 1705
Virginia Slave Law, 1705

In the book, “Between the World and Me,” by Ta-Nehisi Coates, Coates wrote the following:

In America, it is traditional to destroy the black body–it is heritage.

Reverend Thomas Merton (referenced by Pope Francis during a speech before Congress in September 2015) in discussing the civil rights movement and its meaning in a letter to a white liberal wrote the following:

“The Negro children of Birmingham, who walked calmly up to the police dogs that lunged at them with a fury capable of tearing their small bodies to pieces, were not only confronting the truth in an exalted moment of faith, a providential kairos. They were also in their simplicity, bearing heroic Christian witness to the truth, for they were exposing their bodies to death in order to show God and man that they believed in the just rights of their people, knew that those rights had been unjustly, shamefully and systematically violated, and realized that the violation called for expiation and redemptive protest, because it was an offense against God and His Truth.” (Merton (1964), “Seeds of Destruction,” page 44.)

So, the whole class was traumatized; all learning stopped as a result of the violence used against a student who apparently used a cellphone in class to the chagrin of the teacher.


Futility of “Colorblindness”: Georgetown, D.C., Retailers Use of Smartphone Application Devolves to White=Good, All Others=Bad, Paradigm

Virginia Slave Law, 1705
Virginia Slave Law, 1705

From one of my previous posts on “colorblindness,” which applies to the present post–

The majority culture believes in “colorblindness,” but also believes that the majority of the society (whites) are better than everyone else in the society. Open expression of this idea is not socially acceptable, but the institutions of society are empowered to act solely for the benefit or advantage of the majority white population without apology. Questioning of those white hegemonic institutions is met with defensiveness as well as a blaming of the questioner.

In the Washington Post, there is a story about retailers in Georgetown, D.C., using an smartphone application to communicate with other application users and the District of Columbia’s Metropolitan Police Department about persons that have raised their suspicions. Most of those persons rendered as suspicious are Black.

I have several concerns about this application (and its users):

  • Persons are having their pictures taken and published in electronic form and accused of breaking laws with only innuendo, suspicion, and lack of hard facts.
  • Police officers are participants in the application, potentially and likely coloring their views of all nonwhite people, their minds filled with posts of suspicious nonwhite people. (Likewise, this effect can affect the rest of the users of the application.)
  • The application nor its users deal with persistent retail shrink (or inside-job shoplifting). Nothing to date has been able to address it. Focusing on suspicion of a particular race of people (which can be based on biased thoughts) is a harmful and destructive distraction from the real issues of shoplifting and its close relative retail shrink.
  • It appears that Black people are essentially not welcome in a particular portion of the United States (Georgetown, D.C.) based on their race, with participants in interstate commerce. [A tidbit from Georgetown’s history from Wikipedia–“Slave trading in Georgetown began in 1760, when John Beattie established his business on O Street and conducted business at other locations around Wisconsin Avenue. Slave trading continued until the mid-19th century, when it was banned.[25]” See also a column in the Washington PostGeorgetown’s Hidden History by Andrew Stephen.]

Shoplifting is a complex, persistent issue among all human beings; mere reliance on racial bias is unacceptable.


Futility of “Colorblindness:” Jeb Bush and Unfair, Anti-Black, and Untruthful Insinuations

Virginia Slave Law, 1705
Virginia Slave Law, 1705 (Placard displayed at police accountability meeting in Fairfax, Va., September 14, 2015 (regarding the case of Natasha McKenna (deceased))).

Republicans think that black people will vote for their anti-black platform and beliefs because they state it in an acceptable manner–while including wicked implications and insinuations of black people. Such is “colorblindness” as practiced in the United States today: it (anti-black beliefs) is ok as long as it sounds and looks good.

It will not work.

An example is Jeb Bush’s statement (emphasis, in bold, is the blog author’s):

“Look around this room,” a man told Bush, who spoke to a mostly white crowd. “How many black faces do you see? How are you going to include them and get them to vote for you?” asked the man, who was white.

Bush pointed to his record on school choice and said that if Republicans could double their share of the black vote, they would win the swing states of Ohio and Virginia.

“Our message is one of hope and aspiration,” he said at the East Cooper Republican Women’s Club annual Shrimp Dinner. “It isn’t one of division and get in line and we’ll take care of you with free stuff. Our message is one that is uplifting — that says you can achieve earned success.”

Charles Blow, columnist for the New York Times, picked up this insinuation and wrote–

There it is! If you let people talk long enough, the true self will always be revealed. Not only is there a supreme irony in this racial condescension that casts black people, whose free labor helped establish the prosperity of this country and who were systematically excluded from the full benefits of that prosperity for generations, as leeches only desirous of “free stuff,” this line of reasoning also infantilizes black thought and consciousness and presents an I-know-best-what-ails-you paternalism about black progress.

Jeb Bush’s “colorblindness” is tiresome and exhausting to endure.

Futility of “Colorblindness”: Ben Carson Excuses White Hegemony and Chastises, Blames, Critiques Black People; Carson Speaks like Wardell (Ward) Connerly

The great mass of black voters has been deeply turned off by the way the Republicans have been at best indifferent toward them,” he said, “and at worst have displayed a camouflaged hostility that panders to the party base.” –Prof. Randall Kennedy, Harvard Law School

The price of white hegemony is borne by other people.
The terrible cost of the white hegemonic image of “harmony” is borne by others. We can bear it no longer.

The majority culture believes in “colorblindness,” but also believes that the majority of the society (whites) are better than everyone else in the society. Open expression of this idea is not socially acceptable, but the institutions of society are empowered to act solely for the benefit or advantage of the majority white population without apology. Questioning of those white hegemonic institutions is met with defensiveness as well as a blaming of the questioner.

Ben Carson, Republican candidate for the U.S. presidential office, embodies this notion; his black skin color a convenient and comforting camouflage for the anti-black, white hegemonic argument. The sentiment appears to be that the GOP line of argument cannot be offensive if a black person says it. Such a position affirms the high value of race in the society of the United States, specifically that only whites are empowered. Nonwhites are empowered only to the extent to disempower nonwhite groups.

Mr. Carson has been playing this role in several news articles. Carson gives apparent support while following that statement with overarching criticism carefully couched to avoid immediate reaction. [Author’s note: Carson is not fooling anyone; this is a well-practiced tactic of Republicans (and that of the power structure). Carson’s tactics are similar to that of Wardell (Ward) Connerly.]

Asking for peace; wanting silence.
Placard: “Don’t say you want peace when you really mean silence.”

I will provide an example, an interview Carson had with Major Garrett of CBS News, Carson stated that the protestors in the aftermath of the shooting and death of Mr. Michael Brown showed that they actually cared and had begun a dialogue. However, that seeming praise was negated by Carson’s criticism (and blame of black people) (emphasis, in bold, the blog author’s):

He also talked about the different images that come to mind when he considers what happened in Ferguson. “It conjures up [a] an image of the people feeling that they have been unjustly treated by the police, and [b] that justifies civil disturbance,” Carson said. “Of course we all see the images of the burning.”

There is another image in Carson’s mind, too. He told Garrett, “It also conjures up an image of the people being unwilling to actually face the facts. I think the community is unwilling to face the fact that Michael Brown was a bad actor.

[Author’s note: Because Mr. Brown was killed before any arrest, charges, or trial, he still maintains a presumption of innocence, something that Carson recklessly ignores in his zeal to condemn. In Carson’s view, the Ferguson protesters were not justified because it was not for police impunity but rather a desire to disturb the peace, and Mr. Brown was at fault for his death. Thus, all of the racial consequences of the white hegemonic institutions are erased while also confirming the devaluation of black lives.]

For the Black Lives Matter movement, he considers them to be bullies:

But Carson, the only black presidential candidate running as either a Democrat or Republican, went on to say that it was “very different than, let’s say, the Black Lives Matter movement, where it’s foisting yourself on people – rather than engaging in dialogue – and bullying people. I never liked the idea of bullying on behalf of anybody.”

[Author’s note: Carson did not explain what he meant by use of the word “bullying.” Carson’s statements are confusing but fit well into a white-hegemonic apology. However, naming and exposing the negatives of white hegemonic rule is disruptive to the white-advantaged status quo. Because of this, such identifiers of the negative consequences of white hegemony are said to be rude, demanding, domineering, etc.]

Carson’s convoluted, muddled, and self-contradictory statement to Mr. Garrett is a form of the “colorblindness” argument, which wants to advance the idea that everybody is equal, but only white people are valued.

I analyze the “colorblind” argument and Carson’s statements in other articles below.

White hegemonic argument Ben Carson’s comment in Ferguson, Mo.
Defend white hegemony (that is, the status quo) and deny black suffering under the same hegemonic system. I think we’ve actually regressed with this administration and its emphasis on race, because it emphasizes race to indicate that things are not progressing well. And that just isn’t true,” Carson said.

He said the country has regressed because “we’re talking about it a lot more — more people complaining that they’re being treated unfairly. I don’t think we need to be emphasizing what’s unjust. I think we need to be emphasizing what opportunities there are.”

He continued: “A lot of people perceive everything through racial eyes. But my point is, we don’t have to do that. What we have to do instead is begin to see people as people.” [???]

[Author’s note: Also, this argument is convoluted with criticism of President Barack Obama. There is also a call for false balance–because there are no statements of harmony, there should not be any statements of injustice, racism, or unfairness. Of course, if there were harmony, such statements would not be made in the first place.]

Request for item that does not threaten white hegemony It is very important that police are taught to be respectful of everyone,” said Carson. “One lady was talking about the fact that she woke up, her son woke up, and said: ‘There are police out there all over the place! There are armored vehicles out there!’ She went outside, a policeman was walking on the sidewalk, and she asked him: ‘What’s going on?’ He said, ‘nothing.’ That’s not respectful. We need to make sure that respect is offered in both directions.”

[Author’s note: I am uncertain of the worth of this statement. Nothing Carson stated appears disrespectful but rather unresponsive. In so doing he “criticized” the hegemonic institution extremely lightly. This example is vague, but his statements about nonwhite people is clear, negative, and condemnatory. (See the next statement, below, as a further example.)]

Blame, chastise, belabor, bully, etc., black people (generously) I heard more than one time how the thing that really inflamed the community was the fact that Michael Brown’s body laid out on the street for four hours,” said Carson. “I think a lot of people understood that he had done bad things, but his body didn’t have to be disrespected. I heard also that people need to learn how to respect authority.”

Mr. Carson should be ashamed; his previous life’s work has already been negated.