PERSPECTIVE ON BLACK-JEWISH RELATIONS : Recovering a Sense of Community : Black anti-Semitism has roots predating Louis Farrakhan, including Christian teachings and Afrocentrism.

One of the most controversial subjects facing the national convention of the NAACP in Chicago this week is the challenge to the relationship between the African American and Jewish communities posed by the association of Ben Chavis, the NAACP’s executive director, and Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam.

There has been a good deal of miscommunication between the two communities lately, and some clarification of what is happening is in order.

The issue began last fall with a “covenant” formed between the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People, the Congressional Black Caucus and the Nation of Islam, amid reports that Farrakhan was “moderating” his anti-Semitism. The issue escalated when Farrakhan aide Khallid Abdul Muhammad spoke at a New Jersey college and excerpts were published by the Anti-Defamation League, drawing attention to the virulent anti-Semitism that Muhammad was espousing.

Farrakhan held a press conference and waffled on whether he was chastising or endorsing Muhammad’s views. The Black Caucus withdrew from the covenant. But a summit of black leadership in June, planned long before by Chavis, was put on the defensive for still giving Farrakhan a seat at the table.

On the Jewish side, the issue was black toleration of anti-Semitism and its supporters; on the African American side, it was interference in internal matters. From our perspective, it is clear that both sides have misunderstood what happened, why it happened and what the real issues are.

The Nation of Islam, whether represented by Farrakhan or Muhammad, is not the primary source of black anti-Semitism, and American Jews need to understand that. There are three roots to black anti-Semitism: the Christian religion, economic and political conflict and, more recently, Afrocentrism.

Most of us who grew up after World War II remember the efforts of mainline Protestants and Catholics to reach out to the Jewish community. The National Conference of Christians and Jews taught tolerance, appreciation and understanding. The problem is that a new generation has come up with weaker links to the mainline churches. The Roman Catholic Church has only recently recognized its historic role in fostering anti-Semitism and is seeking to build bridges between the two religions. The point is that unless a bridge is actively sought and maintained--and if the traditional interpretation is not balanced--anti-Semitism is a plausible outcome.

Afrocentrism grew out of the need of the black community to understand its history and place in the world based on its own research, rather than the interpretation of whites who treated Africans as savages, figuratively if not literally. Afrocentrism overlooks the history of common domestic struggle of Jews and blacks and draws attention to several points of divergence between the two communities, such as support of the Palestinians vs. support for Israel and opposition to the former apartheid government of South Africa and its political, military and economic alliance with Israel (especially in regard to the Jewish involvement in the international diamond trade). Domestically, Afrocentrism is concerned with African American images in the media, in which Jewish investment is significant.

The intellectuals in the academic community who are seeking to clear away the consequences of a history written by white historians carry their arguments to extremes, as intellectuals are frequently wont to do, but they are influencing a generation of middle-class African American students.

The third cause of black anti-Semitism reflects interest-group conflicts: Jews dominated the teaching profession in the public schools, especially in New York at the end of the 1960s. When African Americans moved into Jewish ghettos, the Jews moved out but their stores and their ownership of property remained. So, over time, it became clear that money flowed only one way.

The linkages that fostered understanding have declined in the past 30 years. We are more segregated now than we were before. Black and Jewish children rarely go to school together today. The old leaders lost contact. The new generation never had any.

On May 27, the National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council said that “the African American community is dealing with problems it must address and has a right to build effective coalitions to advance those efforts,” that it is “up to that community to decide who comes to their meetings . . . “ and that “it is hoped that those who attend will develop strategies enabling the traditional coalition of conscience to continue working together in addressing an agenda of shared domestic concerns.” The council urged continuation of the historic support by the Jewish community for the NAACP at the national and local levels.

Unfortunately, this message of respect was overwhelmed by attempts by the media to shame the NAACP and Chavis into rejecting a segment of the African American community.

The summit that Chavis called to bring together all the leaders of the African American community was planned well before Muhammad was ever heard of outside the Nation of Islam. It was not planned as a structure akin to the Jewish Federation, which has pointedly rejected the extremist Jewish Defense League from its membership. It may be that such a coalition of black organizations will emerge out of the summit’s meetings (the next one is planned for August), but at this point the African American community is engaged in a process of self-exploration.

There is no question that mainstream black organizations do now--and have always--rejected the extremist views of Farrakhan and his ilk. But there is also no question that a lot of work needs to be done between Jews and blacks to understand each other at the organizational and community levels and to rebuild the strength these two communities have when they work together.