Malcolm and Morpheus

Separated at birth?

Malcolm X on Economic Philosophy

"My personal economic philosophy is also Black Nationalism, which means that the black man should have a hand in controlling the economy of the so called, "Negro Community." He should be developing the type of knowledge that would enable him to own and operate the businesses and thereby be able to create employment for his own people, for his own kind."
Malcolm X interviewed in 1964

Bling: Consequences and Repercussions

This documentary on conflict diamonds focuses on the savage nature of the diamond trade. It connects the dots, or rather it shows the disconnect between rappers' promotion of "Ice" and war in Africa (specifically Sierra Leone).
It is worth the 11 minutes it takes to watch.
Diamonds aren't the only good that has a bloody economic history of course. We could just as easily speak of "conflict oil" or perhaps "conflict sugar and rum."
A fundamental economic tenet is that the existence of scarcity implies conflict. A scarce good (economic good) such as diamonds require a sacrifice or cost in order to obtain them.
As the documentary shows this cost is more than money.

The Rich and The Super Rich

Written in 1968 by Ferdinand Lundberg and subtitled, "A Study in the Power of Money Today" the Rich and the Super Rich does make one or two observations concerning Negroes.

When discussing the system of private clubs which the elite use to mark themselves off more precisely from the rest of society the author contributes. "It would be erroneous to say Negroes are barred. They are simply not noticed."

"...Negroes not only lack titles to property...but no one of them seems to be within 250 years of ever having them in any significant proportions. Who would a Negro be likely to inherit from?"

"As large," think Bush, Kennedy, Turner "property holdings are now mainly inherited and hard even for an occasional white nonproprietor to come by, it would seem that Negroes are forever circumstantially barred from becoming considerable American property owners."

Can this be true?

to understand and protect our home planet

The black economist cannot claim to have known that part of NASA's official mission statement was, "to understand and protect our home planet."
That mission statement was changed for political reasons because data from NASA satellites apparently fall on the wrong side of the argument concerning whether western civilization affects the earth (the home planet in question) adversely.
The Black economist can envision a scenario wherein the question was raised as to whether they had to eliminate "understand" being that they are scientists and all.
Jokes aside, this reshuffling of euphemisms is a side argument in a much larger debate concerning not particularly natural resources but mostly markets and their shape. If there is strong evidence that present levels of carbon emissions are leading to the extinction of the human race then a reasonable mind could conclude they must be stopped.
Another ,equally reasonable mind, could conclude that humanity has always adapted to an uncertain world, that speculation is imprecise and that no change is needed.
Both minds, especially if they were politicians, would agree that Americans would vote them out of office if they dared even suggest they reduce consumption levels. That's why our president recommended Americans shop rather than sacrifice after 9/11.
So prices rise. Wars are fought. The present lurches toward the inevitable shock.