Sunday morning I was treated to a most unexpected surprise. There was a debate between Oshay Duke Jackson and his former negromanosphere blogger and You Tube commentator Mumia Obsidian Ali. At first glance, they appeared to be discussing the dysfunctional culture within the black community. But the debate suddenly turned to the gospel of the “Free Market.” Something that Mr. Ali alleges that he understands. But on further progression into the debate, it was clear that he didn’t. I wanted to get some kind of context for the argument, so I listened to his earlier podcasts on the subject. It was clear from the podcast that he based his argument on his failure to obtain the magic 300 patreon subscribers needed to keep his network going.

Oshay’s position was that you take the market how you find it and adjust. His adversary was not so inclined to entertain that position. He cited his massive subscriptions with no losses as to the worth of his product. I continued to listen as he spoke incredulously about the welfare mind state. He argued that the definition of the welfare mind state was people who contributed nothing to the market but relied on the money of those who “paid the freight” to shoulder most of the cost. (paraphrasing)

It was at this point that I quickly concluded that the debate was over and Oshay was the clear winner. “DISCLOSURE! “I WRITE FOR THE NEGROMANOSPHERE! OSHAY DUKE JACKSON SUPPORTS MY EFFORTS.” There I said it. But far from being an echo chamber or yes man, it was clear why Jackson won the argument. His opponent while accurate on the issue of the lack of support for black businesses, failed to state all the possible reasons for this condition. And maybe he didn’t want to. It was clear to him that there was only one reason: a culture of dysfunction. And this was his sole argument. The problem was that he placed the dysfunction solely on the backs of the customer and not on the owner. This presupposes that the business owner cannot suffer from the same dysfunction as a participant in the free market. A point he ran from like an H.I.V. test. When Jackson raised this argument using Ali’s own failure to respond to the dictates of the market as an example, Ali implied that the argument was in “mala fide” (in bad faith) and quietly, proceeded to argue in mala fide.

Furthermore, when he gave a definition of those who were of the alleged welfare mind state, which is in fact a real thing, it was clear that he was arguing a talking point as opposed to real time economics. Any grade school student of economics will tell you that the system is maintained by the welfare mind state. In western economies, people who want something for nothing in fact, spend more money than those who “pay the freight.” The problem is not that they don’t spend their money. It’s where they spend they’re money. Which, in all fairness, goes to Ali’s point.

But what does all of this have to do with the free market or free loaders? Absolutely nothing! If we follow Mr Ali’s sacred apostle of Free Market Economics, Milton Friedman, Black consumer behavior is not dysfunctional at all. It’s simply behaving according to the chaos of supply and demand. Under Friedman’s theories, the free market makes no allowances for jealousy, self hate or any other kind of racial pathology. It’s a creature controlled and regulated only by the money supply. Entrepreneurs if they want to thrive and prosper, are obligated to adjust to the market and not the other way around.  This by the way, was Jackson’s point. Thus, under Friedman’s theory,  If a person will not spend 60 dollar a year on a patreon creator, but will spend $300.00 in one day on a pair of sneakers, those are the breaks. The value is, in fact, determined by the consumer no matter how irrational.

Therefore, it can be concluded that the business owner has one of two options: leave the patreon market and go sell nike sneakers, or find a way to attract consumers to his brand who would pay him or her the $60 dollars a year. But when this discussion was touched on by Jackson, it was ignored by Ali, who only cited his retention of subscriptions as proof of the value of his product. But everyone who samples a product does not necessarily find enough value in it to buy it. So it cannot be concluded that subscriptions are a stone cold indication of your value in the alleged free market place.

The debate here was not economics. If so, Jackson would have won in the first 10 minutes. It was a debate based on the frustrations of personal experiences. While Ali denied this fact, it was all too apparent from the discussion.  When it was further revealed that he himself did not support black businesses even among his own peers, Ali lost the argument even from an anecdotal standpoint; because while the assertion may have been in tu quoque, despite his most stringent denials to the contrary, it was all about him. The evidence was his very own podcast. Thus, while he made a valid claim, he was not interested in taking those steps to verify his claim. Therefore, if you make a claim based on the personal experience (which he did), yet you refuse to explore the alternatives that could invalidate the claim, holding only to a limited view that verifies your own anecdotal evidence, your argument by definition is in bad faith. The only retort to these suggestions concerned some sort of claim of being a kind of trailblazer by being the first black male internet radio podcaster speaking to issues concerning black men. Sorry MR. ALI! But that title belongs to MACKCITY! It popped up on the scene in 2007. So you are close to 10 years too late.

So instead of winning in 10 mins, Jackson simply won by default in 1:24:00 because the opposition threw one punch and ran for the entire 15 rounds.

TONY MACEO is a senior blogger at the Negromanosphere and the Chief Blogger at Power & Strategy.com. Don’t forget to like, share and subscribe to the mailing list at the website, the You Tube Channel or like us on FB. Also you can become a patreon subscriber @powerofstrategies on Patreon. Till next time I’ll holla!



Facebook Comments