I HAVE NOT eaten in 15 days in protest of the NAACP's attempt to prevent youth members from voting in the Baltimore branch's elections.
My family and friends have tried to get me to stop the hunger strike, which has me shrinking at a rate of a pound a day. However, I feel that any injury to my health as a result of not eating is far outweighed by the injury sustained by African-American people if local NAACP leaders who value personal prestige over the rights of poor, black folks are allowed to remain in power.
I am running for the presidency of the local NAACP chapter because I want a chance to provide aggressive leadership that would do such things as increase local NAACP membership and advocate for equal funding for Baltimore's schools.
My nonviolent protest -- in the form of a hunger strike -- against the NAACP stems from the national NAACP's appeal of a December ruling by Baltimore Circuit Judge Robert I. H. Hammerman that allowed dues-paying members 17 to 20 years old to vote for local NAACP officers.
I have asked the newly elected NAACP national chairwoman Myrlie Evers-Williams, legal committee chairman Fred Banks, other members of the NAACP board of directors and acting executive director Earl Shinhoster to withdraw their appeal, which was filed before Ms. Evers-Williams' election. Ms. Evers-Williams has expressed concern about this situation, and I have been assured that a committee is reexamining the matter.
Initially, I had sought relief from the courts after the local branch last October issued a memo stating that NAACP youth members could not vote in branch elections unless they paid the $10 adult membership fee, not the $3 youth fee. I immediately protested the move in a letter to the local board, pleading with it not to levy what amounted to a poll tax on its youth members. I asked the board to rescind its decision.
With virtually no response to my protest, I and three others filed suit in Baltimore Circuit Court in November to delay the election and to determine whether the more than 550 youth members I recruited would be allowed to vote.
That move was not to insure my victory in the local branch's election, but rather it was an effort to insure that the NAACP was held to the same high standards it has come to expect of others.
In reaction to my legal action, local NAACP officials resorted to defaming my character, questioning my motives and arrogantly claiming that they had the high moral ground. In response, I stuck to the issues: The NAACP constitution is clear -- voters in branch elections simply must be at least 17 years old and dues-paying members for at least the past 30 days.
This battle with the NAACP has caused me much distress. I was hurt because when the NAACP had cried out for new members, I had responded by recruiting more than 550. I was hurt again by being called an "outsider" by the group that had awarded me two national honors for my work in the NAACP. I was emotionally bruised when it was said that I had no sincere interest in the welfare of the NAACP. Had they forgotten that I had raised thousands of dollars for the organization? I was hurt again when it was said that I hadn't paid my dues, when, in fact, I am a life member.
I was particularly dismayed by the time, energy and resources employed in this legal battle that could have been used to support NAACP programs. I was distressed, too, because the appeal meant that rather than fighting for freedom, NAACP members would be fighting themselves. However, the key problem with the appeal is that those who are suffering and in distress, looking to the NAACP for leadership and assistance, will have to wait even longer for effective leadership.
As I have contemplated what to do in this matter, I have received much advice. Some of my supporters want me to quit the NAACP, saying that its actions in this matter have proven it is a morally bankrupt, dying organization. Others say I would win even without the youth vote, so let the election begin.
But, in the end, I decided that I was obligated to fight for justice by opposing this appeal. "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere," said Martin Luther King Jr. These words resonate in my mind in relation to this case. In fighting this appeal, I realize that if the rights of one segment of the NAACP membership is violated today, then the rights of other NAACP members may be subject to violation tomorrow.
Of course, some will accuse me of infighting, sullying the NAACP's name. I remind them that the weeds must be plucked to allow the desired crops to grow unobstructed. As for charges of airing dirty laundry in public, I respond that sometimes public airings are necessary to make people realize that their laundry stinks.
The local elections were to have been held this month but were scuttled after the national office filed the appeal. That decision led me to appeal to the consciences of the NAACP's national leadership through my nonviolent protest.
I am cautiously optimistic that the national board will act in my favor. But until the NAACP withdraws its appeal I will continue my hunger strike in an effort to bring attention to the hunger and deprivation in the African-American community, and to call attention to the need for positive and progressive African-American leadership.
Kobi Little, former president of the Johns Hopkins University NAACP chapter, writes from Baltimore.