In my latest essay, Meteor Man asked my opinion on the Green Party’s vice presidential candidate, Ajamu Baraka.

There has been a recent “scandal” that has emerged in that Baraka wrote a piece for a book a guy named Kevin Barrett compiled and edited, and appeared twice on Barrett’s radio show. This issue seems to be that Barrett is a holocaust denier and a 9/11 conspiracy theorist. And that on Barrett’s radio show, Baraka seemed to agree (at least to an extent) with some conspiratorial things that Barrett mentioned. Therefore, why is Baraka being best chums with Barrett? Is Baraka a holocaust denier, too? A 9/11 conspiracy believer? Perhaps an anti-semite?

Ajamu Baraka has recently (August) stated that he was unaware of Barrett’s stance on the holocaust when he penned the article for his book, and that he himself is not a holocaust denier.

Now, feel free to doubt him if you wish, but it is interesting that Baraka is running with, and seemingly strongly aligned policywise with, the only Jewish candidate for president currently running in the top four candidates.

Baraka does trend into conspiratorial theories. He likes the idea of False Flag operations—including certain events in Israel/Gaza, Syria, and the Ukraine. For most, he states that he “suspects” that some of these may have been false flags—not that he believes them outright. He is very against the current government of Israel and how they are treating the palestinians (as am I) and doesn’t think Israel should have been formed in the first place. To a certain extent I have to agree with him there—the United Nations forming a new religious-based nation-state and displacing an indigenous population probably wasn’t a wise idea in the first place. But, what’s done is done, and somehow we need to move on without displacing millions again. Baraka thinks a two-state solution is impossible. I hold out more hope on that front, but in some ways he seems more of a realist than I am, and he might be correct.

(Regarding that point, my opinion follows that of Natasha Mundkur, a University of Kentucky, Louisville student who gave a hell of a speech at Muhammad Ali’s funeral recently:

Impossible is not a fact
Impossible is an opinion
Impossible is nothing

YouTube link to Natasha Mundkur's speech)

But, you know what? As far as Baraka’s occasional fringe opinions go, it doesn’t really matter.

I’m voting for Jill Stein for president.

On the miracle chance that Stein does win the presidency, she is the one who will be leading the country forward, not Baraka. Baraka will hopefully draw in African-American voters to the Green Party. He would also ensure that nobody with power (Israeli lobby, neoliberals, neoconservatives) will want to touch Stein and risk him becoming president with his views, which are even more anti-establishment than Stein's.

And on the hugely unlikely chance that Stein wins the presidency and then dies or has to give it up—Ajamu Baraka will be a beacon of light to the African-American and other minority communities in this country, trying to change the inherent racism that seems all too prevalent in both our population and our governmental policies. That’s who he is and what he has done for most of his life.

I think he has overall a pretty clear view of what is going on in this world with regard to power structures, why the US and other western countries are involved so heavily in places like the middle east. Here’s one quote from him on one of his two appearances on Barrett’s radio show from 2014:

“These are not just geopolitical fights based on principle, but these fights are based on real material realities, real material advantages. So you look at the routes of these various pipelines that are being proposed and actually built to bring natural gas from Central Asia to the European markets. Turkey felt that it was in their interest to make sure that they can influence the best deal possible that will allow them to be positioned to take full advantage of these pipelines. That's one of the reasons many people argue that Syria had to go: that when there were proposals to run these natural gas pipelines from Iran through Iraq and through Syria, that it was a direct threat to some of the ambitions that Erdogan has for Turkey.” (from Wikipedia)

Sounds pretty accurate to me. Especially considering current events in the region.

I have no problem with Ajamu Baraka.

Compare him to Clinton, or Trump, or Johnson, or even any of their vice-presidential running mates—Baraka still comes out way on top. At least he seems to be honest and concerned about real problems. He’s not a criminal or overtly racist like most of the others.

My opinion.

AntePenultimate