Need persists for NAACP

This year marks the 100th anniversary of the founding of the NAACP and every once in awhile somebody questions the relevance of that great organization. Its name originated those many years ago when African Americans were referred to as Colored People and the organization aimed to level America’s economic opportunity and equal justice playing fields.

A few weeks ago a young (30-something) African American woman was the latest person to question the need of the NAACP. The opinion entitled, “Why We Should Get Rid of the NAACP” written by Jonetta Rose Barns, appeared April 19 in The Washington Post.

She wrote, “The organization is as anachronistic as colored-only water fountains and white-only bathrooms. Its racial focus perpetuates the evils it claims it wants to eradicate, and its audiovisual rendering of America as ‘them vs. us’ abets the nation’s balkanization.

“In its heyday, the NAACP was a bulwark against racism: It protected African Americans and demanded economic equity. It deserves praise for helping alter American society. But its mission and method have become obsolete.

I don’t mean this as a post-racial diatribe. Racism is not completely dead. But it isn’t the bogeyman it once was, and the NAACP hasn’t recognized African Americans’ new status or 21st-century realities. It’s stuck on permanent replay, seeing the battles of the past in every situation.”

Like me, Barnes is entitled to her opinion, but I think there’s plenty of work to be done. I’ve been a NAACP member at least 35 years and still see instances of discrimination.

Discrimination against blacks (and other people of color) still occurs but it’s more subtle and harder to prove. In addition, the growing numbers of Hispanic and Asian (of Muslim-speaking countries, particularly) citizens and immigrants in America give those that discriminate more cover.

It’s harder to prove racism or bias when three different peoples of color are unfairly treated. Hispanics, Asians and African Americans still get the lower-paid jobs and are the quickest to be fired.

The current economy is hard on everyone, including whites. But when the economy picks up, does anyone want to wager which group will return to work first?

Barnes stated one thing I do agree with. She wrote, “The NAACP doesn’t have to become a permanent wing in the new black history museum on the National Mall. It could expand the definition of ‘colored’ to more than just blacks.”

In my opinion the NAACP should not be like ultra conservatives or the far right wing of the Republican Party – FWO (for whites only). The “Colored” in the NAACP’s name should be taken literally. It should welcome, accept and represent all people of color who are discriminated against.

Stereotyping years ago suggested most blacks were on welfare, looking for handouts. Today, similar stereotyping occurs – that “Mexicans” (anyone speaking with a Spanish accent is deemed a Mexican) only want to get on public welfare rolls. And aren’t most Arabs stereotyped as terrorists?

No doubt about it, the NAACP needs a bigger umbrella and is still needed.

Nelson Graves, of Augusta County, is a columnist for The News Virginian. E-mail him at .