"MOVE is a revolutionary organisation set up in USA that fights to protect all life by spreading information and standing against the systems that harm life."

What is MOVE's position on abortion, contraception, and non-heterosexual relationships?

Go listen to I 'm a better Anarchist than you.

Move lived a balanced lifestyle that few self styled Anarchists achieve.

..help us demand Mumia Abu Jamal's freedom, thursday 19th of May - 6:30pm at the U$ embassy, grosvenor place or wherever the fuck it is..

so as not to confuse - Mumia rally on Thursday 17th May

"What is MOVE's position on abortion, contraception, and non-heterosexual relationships?"

Can't the organisers answer this? Doesn't seem that complicated a question.

MOVE


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I. Group Profile

Name: MOVE

Founder: Vincent Leaphart A.K.A. John Africa

Date of Birth and Death: July 26, 1931 to May 13, 1985

Birth Place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Year Founded: 1972

Background Information: Vincent Leaphart, who later changed his name to John Africa, established the group MOVE during a period of political strife in Philadelphia.
The organization was set into motion when Leaphart befriended Donald Glassey, a white college professor who was living in Powelton Village in Philadelphia. Glassey was searching for meaning in his life as well as society. He was fascinated by Leaphart, who he described as "the first man [he] had met who was living in complete harmony with what he believed in" (Assefa, 10).

The two men were drawn together by their deep interest in philosophy and natural law. When Leaphart was evicted from his own apartment because of his refusal to exterminate roaches which he felt "were the same as people," Glassey gladly allowed his friend and mentor to move into his own Victorian mansion (Anderson, 4). It was here that they began calling their philosophy "The American Christian Movement for Life, or simply "The Christian Movement for Life" (Anderson, 4). This name was eventually shortened to just the word "MOVE."

John Africa was a very charismatic and persuasive leader, as most leaders of new religious movements tend to be. He and the rest of his followers, many of which were former drug and alchol abusers, viewed the institution of government as an innately evil and corrupt system. He and his followers all took on the surname Africa. All members of the group took on the same name in order to signify that they were part of a common family. The name Africa was not chosen because most of the group's members were African-American, but because of the continent's natural simplicity which symbolizes the group's natural lifestyle and the fact that it is "the continent where all life began," as put by John Africa (Anderson, 4).


Sacred or Revered Texts: John Africa layed out the ideas of his philosophpy of natural law in what is known as The Book or The Guidelines, or simply as The Teachings of John Africa. Africa dictated his ideas to his comrade Donald Glassey who put the Africas ideas into a three hundred page typewritten manuscript (Anderson, 2).
There are also a number of other important books which have been authored by members and people who associate with the group. Mumia Abu-Jamal authored the most noted of these texts. Jamal, a former Black Panther and member of MOVE, was convicted along with eight other members of the group of murdering a police officer on August 8, 1978. He wrote his first book entitled Live from Death Row while in prison in which he criticizes the American prison system, which he accuses of corrupting human beings rather than correcting them. He followed this book up with his most recent book entitled Death Blossoms in which he talks about his experience as a Black Panther and his involvement with MOVE. The book also contains pictures, artwork, and information about groups that support Jamal. While these books are not "sacred" in the normal sense of that concept, they are important statements of the beliefs of the group. There are also additional readings which strongly pertain to the group and their beliefs.


Cult or Sect: Negative sentiments are typically implied when the concepts "cult" and "sect" are employed in popular discourse. Since the Religious Movements Homepage seeks to promote religious tolerance and appreciation of the positive benefits of pluralism and religious diversity in human cultures, we encourage the use of alternative concepts that do not carry implicit negative stereotypes. For a more detailed discussion of both scholarly and popular usage of the concepts "cult" and "sect," please visit our Conceptualizing "Cult" and "Sect" page, where you will find additional links to related issues.

Size of Group: The is no real way to tell exactly how many members of the group existed at any given time since no official record was ever kept. A Philadelphia newspaper estimated the number of members to be 57 active members and 50 supporters during the late 1970s (Assefa, 17). It is certain, however, that the group never exceeded 150 members.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


II. Beliefs of the Group
The MOVE organization spoke out vehemently against all forms of government, including that of the United States, technology, and professed equality with animals and insects. It is important to note that the name MOVE is not an acronym, but a reminder to the group's members that they are to continue moving in the direction of natural law and rather than conforming to the way of living as dictated by society (Nelson 1996). The MOVE statement goes as follows:


MOVE's work is to stop industry from poisoning the air,
the water, the soil, and to put an end to the enslavement
of life -- people, animals, any form of life. The purpose
of John Africa's revolution is to show people through John
Africa's teaching, the truth, that this system is the cause
of all their problems (alcoholism, drug addiction, unemployment,
wife abuse, child pornography, every problem in the world) and
set the example of revolution for people to follow when they
realize how they've been oppressed, repressed, duped, tricked
by this system, this government and see the need to rid
themselves of this cancerous system as MOVE does.

Members of the group view the teachings of John Africa as "the truth." According to John Africa, "the presence of truth is the presence of God." The group aims to move in a direction towards God and not man. To live in accordance with the system is to live in man's which they believe is opposed to God's way. They believe that life should be lived according to natural law, which is God's law (Assefa, 10). They believe that people simply use religion to interpret and define things in their lives. They believe that religion should be lived and not used as a tool of debate.
John Africa serves as a religious figure to the members of MOVE as Jesus does to members of the Christian faith. This is evident when reading about the life of MOVE member Merle Africa. She talks about her life of drug addiction, alcoholism, depression, and suicidal tendencies. She sought help for her problems through "the system" in group therapy sessions and by seeing a psychiatrist. Her life only began to turn around when she became a part of MOVE. She and the other members of the group viewed the teachings of John Africa as "the gospel", just as Christians view the teachings of Jesus as the gospel. She also talks about how she believes that John Africa miraculously cured a tumor in her stomach that even doctors were not able to see nor treat. Members of the group believed so fervently in John Africa that they even believe that he had the power to heal. Many of MOVE's members had lives similar to that of Merle Africa and were former drug addicts and alcoholics who proclaimed that John Africa had straightened out their lives. Jeanne Africa, a young, white, female member of the group claims that John Africa "gave [them] a lot of solutions to problems [they] had in The Lifestyle. [They] had people who were on drugs, he got them off drugs. He was like a messiah" (Anderson, 7).

Members of MOVE believe in living in a state of nature and stand strongly against technology. The group aimed to "stop man's system from imposing on life" (Assefa,11). The group lived very primitively in their headquarters in Philadelphia, without the luxuries that technology has to offer. The group tried to decrease their dependency on modern technology by doing without heat, running water, or electricity (Nelson, 1996). They never ate any cooked or processed foods and their diet consisted mainly of raw fruits and vegetables (Anderson, 10). They even ate raw meat at times. They did not seek medical treatment for illness or disease but instead chewed garlic to ward off disease. They burned candles for light and used what was basically junk for furniture (Nelson 1996). The members bathed very infrequently since bathing with soap was forbidden (Anderson, 10). They let their hair grow out to its fullest, natural length and wore it in the form of dreadlocks. The group members dressed alike in heavily soiled, torn clothing and children sometimes wore no clothing at all. Members living in the head-quarters had no plumbing system, but rather buried their human waste in outhouses on their property (Assefa, 15). The also threw food remains out in their backyard so that it could be "cycled" back to nature (Assefa, 15). The group also allowed stray animals to come in and out of the headquarters as they so desired and did not kill or exterminate insects since they believed that animals and insects share complete equality with human beings (Nelson 1996). The groups radical living situation, which stood in line with their belief to live in a natural state without the use of technology, caused them to come into conflict with their neighbors and the surrounding community.

The lifestyle of the group kept in line with their radical beliefs and their radical living conditions. The order of the day at MOVE headquarters was called progeniture (Anderson, 9). Men, women, and children had roles which they were expected to fulfill. Men were expected to be sexually potent, and women were expected to bear many children. The encouragement to fulfill these sexual roles was called "the natural order of life," or the "Wisdom of Mama" (Anderson, 9). John Africa did not have any children of his own, but he was viewed by the members as the figurative father of the MOVE family (Anderson, 9).

Women were taught that their main role was that of conceiving and giving birth to children. John Africa taught them to "DO AS, be like the principle of life," the principle of life being procreation (Anderson, 9). Women were not allowed to use any forms of contraception such as birth control, and abortions were forbidden. They were also not allowed any medical attention such as visits to the gynecologist or the obstetrician. They were expected to give birth completely naturally, without any medical care. Upon giving birth, women were expected to lick their babies clean and sever the umbilical cord by biting it with their teeth. After biting the umbilical cord, they had to eat it (Anderson, 9).

Children growing up in MOVE's headquarters had particularly difficult lives. The children were especially important in upholding and perpetuating the beliefs of the group because they could grow up without ever knowing what life is like in the "system" (Anderson, 9). Children were allowed to wear very little clothing, if any at all. The usually were naked during the summer and wore light clothing during the winter. The diet of the children was only that of raw fruits and vegetables and their bodies would never be "contaminated" by meat or fish (Anderson, 9). Children were not allowed to take part in the "Distortion Days," or "D-Days," days in which their parents were allowed to indulge in all of the meat and junk food they could eat (Anderson 10). There was no need for days like these for the children since they would never know these "addictions" of society which their parents craved. The idea was to keep the children as pure as possible and free of the "taste of perversion" (Anderson, 10). Children were not taught in the public schools because this form of schooling was, of course, part of the "system." They were taught instead at the headquarters from The Guidelines (Assefa, 15).

The daily activities of MOVE members included going to frequent meetings at which they were taught the "Wisdom of Africa" by John Africa. People in the group were assigned titles such as "Minister of Defense," "Full Naturalist Minister," "Minister of Communications," "Minister of Information," etc. (Anderson, 10). John Africa was known as "The Co-Ordinator" of the group. He would hand out assignments to be done by everyone for the day. One person may be assigned to go grocery shopping while another person may be assigned to exercise the children or picket at one of the frequent demonstrations the group held (Anderson, 10). The group also had a very rigorous exercise regimen to ensure that they would stay healthy and strong. Members would wake up as early as 4:30 in the morning to go to a nearby park to run and do calisthenics (Assefa, 15). Men were reported to have run 10 to 15 miles during these exercise periods while wearing knapsacks with telephone books or even bricks inside of them (Assefa, 10). Children, as well as the stray dogs in their care were expected to take part in this exercise regimen also. Another part of the group's day involved working to earn money. In order to do this, the group ran a car wash which they did for donations (Assefa, 10). They also shoveled snow for neighbors who sympathized with them and sold fruits and vegetables to people on the street (Assefa, 10).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


III. MOVE's Relationship With Society
The living arrangements of MOVE at their headquarters in Philadelphia lead neighbors to complain about the garbage, the human and animal wastes, as well as other health hazards to the community (Nelson 1996). The tension between the group and the rest of the community lead the city to demand an inspection of MOVE's property in Powelton Village. The group refused, and further fortified their headquarters by building an eight foot blockade around their property. When city officials came to the group's headquarters with a court order to search the property, six members of the group stood on top of the blockade they had built brandishing weapons at city officials and holding signs which said "Long Live the House that John Africa Built" (Anderson, 30). This lead to a confrontation on August 8, 1978, in which the police moved in against the compound, and officer James J. Ramp was shot dead, allegedly by MOVE members. Following this incident, nine members of the group, including Mumia Abu-Jamal, were convicted of third degree murder and sentenced to 30 to 100 years in prison (Wagner-Pacifici, 32).

Following this incident, the group relocated to a row house which they fortified like a bunker and became even more vocal with their anti-government teachings in an effort to free the nine members they felt were wrongly convicted (Anderson, 55). Neighbors soon began to complain about the groups unsanitary conditions and about the noise from the group blasting their profane messages over loud speakers set outside of the row house (Brin 1996). The group also had in its possession firearms which made them a potentially dangerous group.

After months of complaining to Mayor W. Wilson Goode, the police planned a siege on the rowhouse in an attempt to serve arrest warrants against four members of the group. When the group refused to surrender to police, a violent outbreak of gunfire broke out and lasted for 90 minutes (McCroy 1996). Mayor Goode approved of the use of an explosive, and police put into effect their plan to drop a bomb onto the bunker, creating a hole for tear gas. The bomb failed to destroy the bunker, but it did start a fire on the roof which began to blaze out of control (McCroy 1996). By the time the tragedy was over, the fire had destroyed the MOVE house as well as 61 other homes, leaving 260 people homeless (Bowser, 31). The bodies of six adults, including the body of John Africa, as well as the bodies of five children were pulled from the burned house. The only survivors of the blaze were Ramona Africa, 41, and a thirteen year old boy named Birdie Africa (Goldberg 1996). The two escaped by crawling through a window in the basement. Ramona Africa was convicted of riot charges and conspiracy and served seven years in prison (Brin 1996).

The city received criticism for its handling of the MOVE situation, but a very long period went by before the city had to take responsibility for what happened. While in prison, Ramona Africa filed suit against the city, Mayor Goode, and the former Police Commissioner Gregore J. Sambor, as well as other officials. Her actions lead to the filing of two other suits by families of relatives killed in the fire (Goldberg 1996). A federal judge, however, granted Mayor Goode immunity from the lawsuits, ruling that the judgement to use an explosive was reasonable at the time. Other city officials, however, were fair game as defendants (McCroy 1996). The city settled the claims of the families of the five dead children out of court in a sum totaling $2.5 million. The city also agreed to pay Birdie Africa $1.7 million (Brin 1996). It was eleven years before a jury finally found the city liable for what happened on May 13, 1985. A jury found the city guilty of using excessive force and of violating MOVE's constitutional right to protection against unreasonble siezure and searching (Goldberg 1996). Ramona Africa was awarded the amount of $400,000 for pain and suffering, plus an additional $100,000 for the disfiguring burns she received in the fire (Brin 1996). The two other co-plaintiffs who were relatives of John Africa and Frank Africa, both of whom were killed in the fire, received a total of $1 million for pain and suffering. The city of Philadelphia ended up spending about $33 million repairing damaged houses, settling claims to dead MOVE members, as well as other costs generated by the tragedy (Brin 1996). This incident foreshadowed other confrontations between the government and cults, the most famous stand-off being that which occurred between the FBI and the Branch Davidians in 1993 at Waco, Texas (Goldberg 1996).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


IV. Links to MOVE Web Sites
The History of John Africa's MOVE
The Hartford Web Publishing creates pro bono web pages to (a) promote global social progress, (b) serve the people of Hartford, and (c) support working-class education. This page connects to eight documents that tell the history of MOVE through the eyes and hearts of members and friends who experienced it over the past twenty years.
 http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/index-bb.html

The Move Organization Web Site
We we last examined this page it consisted of a single page with contact information.
 http://www.moveorg.net/home.html


25 Years on the MOVE

The is one of several renditions of a short history of MOVE. This one includes several working links at the end
 http://move.enviroweb.org/index.html

Philadelphia, city officials ordered to pay $1.5 million in MOVE case
News story form CNN on June 24, 1996 reporting that a jury found that the city, former Police Commissioner Gregore Sambor and former Fire Commissioner William Richmond used excessive force and violated the MOVE members' constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure in the May 13, 1985 incident
 http://www.cnn.com/US/9606/24/move.vertict/

Archives of Philadelphis Special Commission on MOVE
This is index of the archives of the special commission which are housed in the Temple University Library. No original source documents are available on line.
 http://www.library.temple.edu/urbana/psic-abo.htm











--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


V. Bibliography

Assefa, Hizkias and Paul Wahrhaftig. 1988.
Extremist Groups and Conflict Resolution. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Anderson, John and Hilary Hevenor. 1987.
Burning Down the House. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., Inc.

Bowser, Charles W. 1989.
Let the Bunker Burn. Philadelphia: Camino Books.

Brin, Dinah W. 1996.
"$1 a week in penance." The Associated Press. The Seattle Times Company.

Goldberg, Debbie. 1996.
"City Found Liable in Attack on MOVE." The Washington Post. 25 June 1996: A03.

Nelson, Jeffrey and Gina Kaye Maddox. 1996.
"A Rhetorical Study of the MOVE Diatribe in Contemporary America." The Pennsylvania Speech Communication Annual. 1-3.

Wagner-Pacifici, Robin. 1994.
Discourse and Destruction. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

 http://themoveorganization.com/

"The lifestyle of the group kept in line with their radical beliefs and their radical living conditions. The order of the day at MOVE headquarters was called progeniture (Anderson, 9). Men, women, and children had roles which they were expected to fulfill. Men were expected to be sexually potent, and women were expected to bear many children. The encouragement to fulfill these sexual roles was called "the natural order of life," or the "Wisdom of Mama" (Anderson, 9). John Africa did not have any children of his own, but he was viewed by the members as the figurative father of the MOVE family (Anderson, 9).

"Women were taught that their main role was that of conceiving and giving birth to children. John Africa taught them to "DO AS, be like the principle of life," the principle of life being procreation (Anderson, 9). Women were not allowed to use any forms of contraception such as birth control, and abortions were forbidden. They were also not allowed any medical attention such as visits to the gynecologist or the obstetrician. They were expected to give birth completely naturally, without any medical care. Upon giving birth, women were expected to lick their babies clean and sever the umbilical cord by biting it with their teeth. After biting the umbilical cord, they had to eat it (Anderson, 9)."

Anyone is entitled to their religous beliefs, but MOVE's position on women doesn't seem to be very "revolutionary". Are these quotes objective, or are they taken out of context? Why are Move being promoted on Indymedia? Can someone explain?

On paper thois group sopund somewhat dodgy to say the least. Who is organizing the tour, what do they have to say? Can they vouch for them? There seems to be a good spread of dates around UK social centers and the like.

As a queer, mixed parentage, working class woman I am unsure if there is any specific political movement or group that does not in some way have beliefs, practices or ideas that do not always suit mine or include me. Does this mean that I become apolitical and not find areas where there is consensus - of course bloody not.

For me MOVE are a very inspiring and interesting example of resistance within America, particularly Black resistance. What is equally important for activists internationally to be aware of is the level of state repression and COINTELPRO actions against the MOVE organisation. This is what the US government will do when they fear political movements, especially from the Black community.

Equally, if the US will bomb, kill, maim, imprison on false charges - their own citizens, how can they continue to deny the war crimes that they commit on a daily basis to those who do not carry a passport with the eagle on it.

Anarchists regularly ask me (the token brown one), how to engage Black communities in vegan issues, green issues, class issues etc etc etc. MOVE are a great example of a Black radical organisaton that does encompass politics on a holistic level - it ain't just about skin colour you know.

If you wanna know about women and MOVE - come along and talk to Ramona Africa.
If you wanna ask questions/debate - then come and do so.

There are plenty of activists that grow dreads, listen to Bob Marley and hang out at dub nights. Have you asked any true Rasta's lately what they think about abortion, contraception et al.

You probably wouldn't like the answer - but are ya gonna stop listening and dancing to roots music? I know I won't. Sometimes we got to figure out where the consensus is, and start discussing and opening up debate on the moe difficult levels.

There is no true absolutely sorted activist or group. Please don't let your hesitancy about MOVE begin to appear racist.

"What is MOVE's position on abortion, contraception, and non-heterosexual relationships?"

Seems like a simple enough question to me. Why can't it be answered now? And why could asking it possibly be construed as racist??!!

Yeah. I'd kinda like this question answered now. I want to decide wether or not to go along or wether I should be picketting.

"Please don't let your hesitancy about MOVE begin to appear racist."

I've heard very little about this group, cult, or whatever (are they even stoill going?) But what the fuck is that supposed to mean? Your post reads like bullshit I'm afraid 'anarcha-feminist', don't know you, but it does. I think David Koresh got a hard time, so did Jehovahs Witness during WW2 - doesn't mean we're on the same side. Tour looks interesting, but why can't the organisers come up with a bit more than they have to let people like me know what Move are about. Personally I couldn't give a flying fuck what rastas think anymore than I could moonies or Roman catholics.

I have only ever heard of MOVE in relation to Mumia Abu-Jamal, so I am a bit surprised to read of the positions they appear to take on these issues, Even MOVE's own site gives the impression of being a religious cult. Is this still the case though, maybe the sites I've looked at are out of date, or maybe MOVE's position has changed. I agree that it would be good to know.

John M

i'm slightly confused by people's reaction to the speaking tour. surely engaging with the speaking tour would allow an opportunity for these questions to be answered/debated. who better to answer questions on the position of women than a woman member of MOVE.

would some of the above writers boycott/picket a speaking tour with people from iraq, afghanistan, pakistan talking about injustices, murders and repression in their countries - because some of them are muslim and therefore having some not so cool views on queers and abortion etc?

it's a genuine question by the way? i think the range of comments above sparks an interesting debate that we maybe need to be having with ourselves and each other.

what does solidarity mean to us? what threshold does a group, nation, country, population need to achieve in order for us to be in solidarity? what do we need to achieve in order for them to be in solidarity with us.

i use the terms "them" and "us" as it seems there's an undefined but agreed "us" in the above comments.

Way to go Anarchist,

Post a question about something at 8.11pm on the 14th, and then again, sounding slightly shirty that it hasn't been answered yet at 11.52pm on the same day, and then again the next day at 6.28pm. Fucking hell! Give the organisers a chance! Not everybody spends all day every day on here...

This is quite interesting, but would be more so if it was clearer what MOVE actually believed. I'm sure much will be explained at the talks, but why tease us? :) There does to seem to be something a bit contraditory about what's being said about MOVE. I think it's different with for example Iraqi civilians being bombed because they're not necessarily pretending to be anarchists (if that's what MOVE are about.) If MOVE ARE claiming to be anarchists how can they adhere to the sexist views they APPARENTLY have. Surely it wouldn't be too much trouble for MOVE to lay out their stall a bit better?

BTW I think we can be in solidarity with people without necessarily supporting all their views, prisoners for example or the Zapatistas maybe. I'm not sure MOVE fall into that category though.

Ramona Africa as part of the MOVE organisation fought tirelessly for animal rights and environmental justice as well as living in daily resistance to an overtly racist Philadelphia police force. As a result of their resistance Ramona saw nine of her brothers and sisters imprisoned in 1978 - where they remain - one has died inside. In 1985 the state sought the final solution for MOVE by attacking their house with 10,000 rounds of ammunition and dropping a bomb on them - six adults and five children were burned alive. Ramona was the only adult able to escape with one of the children. She was then sent down for seven years.

If you want to come and ask her whether she uses condoms or has had an abortion or if she has sex with other women - feel free!!!

The first response to the original post was a question: "What is MOVE's position on abortion, contraception, and non-heterosexual relationships?"

It is a question that has not been answered and I find some of the responses from the Cowley Club organiser to be somewhat disingenuous. MOVE's position on abortion, contraception, and homosexuality was not decided by women, it was decided by a man - JOHN AFRICA ('THE COORDINATOR'), MOVE's demi-God. It is not a question of MOVE members not choosing to practice contraception or abortion, or just happening to be heterosexual - they are vehemently opposed to a woman's right to choose abortion, to the use of contraception, and MOVE condemn homosexuality as an abomination (because the purpose of sex is procreation.) So the organisers of this tour are either being conned or they are trying to con the rest of us.

Where would MOVE be without Mumia Abu-Jamal? Just a washed-up bunch of cranks with reactionary religious and political views. It is shameful that people choose to muddy the waters about Mumia by defending the indefensible position of MOVE.

"What is MOVE's position on abortion, contraception, and non-heterosexual relationships?"

That says a lot.

"3) The fact that ‘Yellow Peril’ has ‘heard very little of this group’ is the whole point of organising this tour!"

So presumably you think their politics are worth hearing about - surely you must know a bit more about them? You are selling a pig in a poke as the Americans say - trying to sell something without making it clear what it is. Being 'pro-life' seems to be very central to MOVE, so how does that work with abortion for instance - are they 'pro-choice' or not? And what is their position on gay rights, do they really think gay and lesbian people are an 'abomination'. Why can't you just be honest instead of just saying 'well you should come along and ask'? Or don't you actually know yourselves what MOVE's politics are?

As far as I can see the FBI had no involvement in the events. Why does this article say that they did?

For why I stand against MOVE please visit my websites, either  http://antimove.blogspot.com or  http://themoveorganization.com

If anyone has direct questions about MOVE/Mumia, please feel free.

Here is a sampling of my work:

MOVE and Child Abuse

To call what MOVE does to the children of the cult "child abuse" is perhaps, a disservice to these most innocent and powerless victims of the group.

The cheapening of these children’s lives begins not at birth, but prior to it.

People familiar with MOVE are also familiar with the fact that the cult forces it’s young female members to act as barely literate breeding machines. But what might not be so widely known is that these children having children also forego pre-natal and post-natal health care, instead they rely solely on the voodoo of John Africa to carry them through.

And while there are those on the peripheral of MOVE who would bristle at this idea, I only invite them to ask their MOVE idols if what I am saying is true, or better yet I dare them to do so. The answer just might be a surprise.

This gambling upon the wisdom of a madman who effectively killed himself and caused the death of the six children in his care back in 1985 should not be over looked. And neither should the race of these children. They are nearly exclusively black. Were this not the case, I would not be the only person to call attention to this brutality. That much I am sure of.

But, I would argue that race is not the primary core of the lack of outrage at this situation. The primary issue is one of a purported faith.

As long as MOVE members make the claim that their deeds are born out of belief, than many are hard pressed to question the validity of their claims. For in our society, it goes without saying that the default position of any organized madness is in the trenches of "belief".

Imagine for a moment that the crude theology of John Africa were erased from the equation. What would remain is a small group of primarily, but not exclusively, African-Americans forcing their children to be ignorant of all but the most basic of knowledge. These children, once they hit puberty are than forced to reproduce prodigiously. And the support structure of this entire assault on the life of young minds and bodies consists of primarily white people.

How long would such an outrage stand? I would argue, not long. And I would further argue that people would call it what it is, and that is modern day slavery.

But hide this whole vulgar enterprise behind some platitudes harkening submission to a higher power and all is good.

It is not "good" enough for me and should not be for anyone else.

And while I am with Freud in thinking that as long as there is darkness and death, that there will be those who attempt to mitigate these fears via metaphysical means, I also am given to the notion that not all "faiths" are created equally, that some have proven to be demonstrably dangerous and deadly to those within their orbits.

It is there where I believe a line ought to be drawn.

Should a parent force the veil of Islam upon their child? Or worse yet, the clitoral desecration of infants still practiced in some Islamic states?

Should children raised in fundamentalist Christian churches have their minds poisoned with the not-even-a-pseudo-science-known-as-"creationsim"?

My answer to all of the above is obviously no.

But even as abhorrent as all of the aforementioned physical and emotional impositions of superstitious barbarisms are, I don’t think they rise to the level of MOVE’s crimes against children.

Physical wounds can be healed and undone. Adherents of various religious texts can read them and therefore raise challenges, and are than empowered to make a conscious choice to either accept or reject the mythology forced upon them. They have some semblance of a choice.

Children of MOVE have no choice and barely have a chance.

They are viewed not as individual entities or even subjects of their parents, but are seen as property of the sects hopelessly corrupt leaders. I saw this myself as parents in MOVE were routinely undermined and the child’s rearing be steered by senior MOVE members who ostensibly knew better.

The written teachings of MOVE founder John Africa are not open for review by MOVE’s young devotees (who couldn’t read them anyways). They told what John Africa allegedly taught and are expected to take the word for it. It pretty much goes without saying that what John Africa taught always seems to coincide with the deeds and desires of MOVE’s leaders. It is Animal Farm with dread locks.

Reading and writing is frowned upon, but mind numbing TV shows and violent movies are fine for the children of the sect.

And what of attending some of the institutions of higher learning where MOVE’s propagandists have reaped a wealth of money?

Forget it.




MOVE members can speak there, but none will be allowed to even conceptualize the thought of going there to learn.



Which leads to my next point.



In order to keep a complete authoritarian situation in place, MOVE’s leaders must, by definition, be anti-intellectual, stifle abstract thoughts, crush intellectual dissent, and keep the children who eventually become adults as dependant as possible on the cult for all of their primary needs as a person. And that is precisely what is done.



The "marrying off" of barely pubescent girls is not so much an extension of some kind of sexual perversion, or at least not that I am aware of, but rather a mechanism of control that is as old as it is vile. Young girls who are birthing babies at twelve years old are not exactly prone to abandoning their entire support system, particularly when they have never had any access to any kind of independence, either physical, or mental.



What is perhaps most sad and disturbing about all of this is that these children are not inherently dim-witted. On the contrary, they are clearly bright and inquisitive and like all children, want to embrace the world around them, but are prevented from doing so.
And the far-left who has romanticized MOVE have also romanticized the children of MOVE. This was apparent in the coverage of the recent protests on behalf of Mumia last month. It was pointed out that a group of MOVE children "under the age of ten" were busy telling the crowd why they all were there, to "Free Mumia".



But what I want to know is who is working to free the children of MOVE?

Having just been to see MOVE last night I found the whole thing very disconcerting.

Firstly yes MOVE are anti-gay they are alo anti-contraception and anti-science. I asked them what would
happen if a MOVE child turned out to be gay, they said they would be thrown out of MOVE. To all intents and
purposes they are a very right-wing conservative cult. That btw doesn't mean that what happened to them was
justified, it was cold bloodied racist murder. But do you think if they were NOT black eco-vegetarians the greens/green anarchists and indymedia would give them the time of day? I think not.