Thanks to the good folks at Pan-African Community Action (PACA) for hosting the following post-film discussion. What are recorded are my comments and responses to questions all of which came after a screening of the Media Education Foundation‘s documentary, Occupation of the Mind: Israel’s Public Relations War in the United States. The event, though inspired by events surrounding recent remarks from Marc Lamont Hill, was meant to support the community organizing work of PACA and we encourage as much support of their work as is possible. 

* CORRECTION * “Woodrow Wilson” was not part of Levin/Zirin’s discussion of Zionism and was mentioned by me in error, apologies (wrong world war!🙄). However, Wilson was instrumental in the development and deployment of propaganda. His creation of the Committee on Public Information is one example.


  1. Marc Lamont Hill and the legacy of punishing black internationalists by Noura Erakat
  2. The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering by Norman Finkelstein
  3. The Hidden History of Zionism by Annie Levin
  4. The Science of Coercion by Chris Simpson
  5. Propaganda by Edward Bernays
  6. The Israel Project’s 2009 Global Language Dictionary by Frank Luntz


  1. I am replying too a comment reply you sent to me. You advised me to search Dr. John Henrik Clarke, to attempt to understand what you meant by the term “Black”. This reply unlike the first concerns your comment “Land and culture” regarding identity. Isn’t culture (idea) as objective as land, when in the hands of humanity. When we speak of land are we not speaking of it in terms of Relationship to the land, not ownership. Is it possible to never have set foot in Africa but still be African? I see the descendants of slaves as different from descendants of enslaved Africans. I definitely agree with you on Dr. Adams critique. I don’t understand you comment for “Brevity” and public conversation, Black is an efficacious area of study, or how do you use and not relate it to identity?

  2. Dr. Ball and i call you Dr. Ball because I think your hard work has earned that respect. At 10:14 you introduce a subject of Dr. Russell Adams, myth of origin and Descendants of slaves. Here in Chicago we have a discussion of rather we should be called Black, or African, a discussion I will call the “naming question.” We would recognize the naming question as one which has existed for Blacks in the US for over 200 years. I don’t use the term descendants of slaves, but I prefer to use,” descendants of enslaved Africans in the U.S”. This concept takes into consideration the colonial question you mentioned, and also the criticism of the term Black which argues Black doesn’t identify with a land base as other nationalities do.(i.e Irish American, Polish American Italian American) To argue that identity relies exclusively on land as some do,is to say that Blacks have no identity, which I would argue is incorrect. Different discussion from the Negro has no History. identity must then rely on culture, language, and the relationship to the land rather than ownership of or too a specific land? I agree with you on Dr. Adams as well as DOS, but I am not prepared to argue the point of colonialism.

    1. Im not sure I understand all your points here. My use of “Black” is for brevity and public conversation that isn’t specific to identity. I am largely an adherent to Dr. John Henrik Clarke, please do a site search here for him, and recognize the importance of relating identity to land and culture, which was where my critique of Adams was coming from.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: