TIME 100 Icons Meghan and Harry Call Global Citizens to Action in Central Park

Harry and Meghan head the list: TIME 100 Most Influential People

Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, are headliners in this year’s TIME 100. Their own narrative was written by Spanish chef José Andrés, founder of World Central Kitchen, a non-profit devoted to providing meals in the wake of natural disasters.

The trio combined their activist energies in December 2020, when José Andrés and his non-profit, World Central Kitchen, became the first major charitable contribution of Harry and Meghan’s Archwell charity.

Harry and Meghan | Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweaka | UN Ambassador Linda Thomas Greenfield

AOC wrote about Harry and Meghan’s activist work on COVID vaccinations worldwide in our introduction of TIME 100: Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Director General of the World Trade Organization. Prince Harry and Meghan asked the question: what will it take to vaccinate the world? “Unity, cooperation and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala,” is their answer.

As Chair of the Board of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance (2016 – 2020) and also AU COVID-19 Special Envoy and WHO COVID-19 Special Envoy, Okonjo-Iweala has existing skills and knowledge around global vaccine efforts.

Writing about the Trump administration’s blocking of Okonjo-Iweala’s rise to head of the WTO, we noted her close relationship with Linda Thomas-Greenfield, now US President Biden’s UN Ambassador. As we predicted, one of the very first initiatives in the new Biden Administration was to end the Trump blockade against Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala.

Global Citizens Held Hands September 24th in Central Park

AOC’s dot-connecting came full circle on Saturday with the truly epic Global Citizen concert that ran for 24 hrs. moving around the globe. The New York City Central Park action went live post-Paris at about 5pm. An hour or two in to the concert, it was clear that someone was in the house. Cries of glee, clapping — some rock star had arrived.

Well, they are rock stars — Meghan and Harry — and it was our chance to claim them as our own. The crowd was in love with the couple — as is AOC. Are they perfect? No, for heavens sake. And who is? We are so happy to have these global activists making their home now in America. We need them here, as America tries to get our act together once again.

“My wife and I believe that where you’re born should not dictate your ability to survive,” Prince Harry said. “So Global Citizens, we ask you tonight: Do you think we should start treating access to the vaccine as a basic human right?

“When we start making decisions through that lens, where every single person deserves equal access to the vaccine, then we can achieve what is needed together for all of us,” he added. 

And then who did Harry and Meghan introduce next at the Global Citizen ? UN ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield, who they met for the first time earlier in their New York City visit.

Harry and Meghan: Glamping in Botswana to Hollywood Royalty

The Wall Street Journal wrote last week Prince Harry and Meghan Hustle to Become Royalty — in Hollywood. Like the Obamas, the couple has media deals with Netflix and Spotify and have already produced a six-segment mental health series for Apple TV.

29 Million US viewers watched Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s 2018 wedding, compared to 23 million US viewers for Prince William and Kate Middleton. Our own postings about Harry and Meghan’s wedding remain high in Google search results.

In fact, it wasn’t the wedding that was on my mind last week, when thinking about Harry and Meghan pre-Global Citizens Concert. I’ve always been interested in the trend towards glamping. My partner’s children thought it was hilarious that I once wore kitten heels on a camping trip and took about 100 pics of my feet.

It was then that I knew glamping, not camping, was in my future. Writing about an imaginary wedding proposal on a glamping trip — inspired by a real life wedding featured in British Vogue — triggered my memory of writing about Harry and Meghan’s third date — when they flew to Botswana in Africa.

As Harry put it: “We camped out with each other under the stars, sharing a tent and all that stuff. It was fantastic.”

In the AOC article Harry was promoting the National Geographic documentary ‘‘Into the Okavango’ . I couldn’t help thinking about Harry and Meghan and Harry’s profound attachment to Africa. Harry described his pre-Meghan relationship to Africa as one in which he loses himself in the bush. “This is where I feel more like myself than anywhere else in the world. I wish I could spend more time here….”

Writing about energy vortexes on AOC’s imaginary glamping trip to the American Southwest, I knew that Harry and Meghan would share the same enthusiasm, based on their third date at Botswana’s sustainable Meno a Kwena safari lodge.

Botswana’s sustainable Meno a Kwena safari lodge. Courtesy

VA Supreme Court Says Dead White Men Do Not Rule: Remove the Damn Statue!

The statue of Confederate military leader, anti-United States successionist General Robert E. Lee has loomed six stories tall over Virginia’s state government and its citizens in Richmond since 1890. After a never-ending series of court battles, the VA Supreme Court ruled definitively last Thursday that the state of Virginia may now begin to disassemble the infamous, 12-ton statue.

The court ruled that "restrictive covenants" in the 1887 and 1890 deeds that transferred the statue to the state no longer apply. In June 2021

Virginia Solicitor General Toby Heytens argued before the court for less than a minute last June, regarding one of two cases seeking to block removal of the Lee statue that “no court has ever recognized a personal, inheritable right to dictate the content of poor government speech about a matter of racial equality, and this court should not be the first one ever to do so.”

Virginians who sued to keep the Confederate General in place to rule over Richmond are Helen Marie Taylor, John-Lawrence Smith, Evan Morgan Massey, Janet Heltzel and George D. Hostetler — and, in the second case, William Gregory, a descendant of the original landowners.

"Those restrictive covenants are unenforceable as contrary to public policy and for being unreasonable because their effect is to compel government speech, by forcing the Commonwealth to express, in perpetuity, a message with which it now disagrees," the justices wrote.

Gov. Ralph Northam said upon the announcement of the court’s ruling: “Today it is clear—the largest Confederate monument in the South is coming down.”

Over a hundred thousand witnesses attended the erection and unveiling of the statue in 1890. The event represented a clear turn in the burgeoning growth of perpetuating a Southern Lost Cause mythology.

As historian David Blight wrote in ‘Race and Reunion’, “More than ghosts emerged from the Richmond unveiling of 1890; a new, more dynamic Lost Cause was thrown into bold relief as well. “

Blight set the stage for the unveiling: “The orator, Archer Anderson, treasurer of the Tredegar Iron Works, set the tone for the Lee remembered, the man of “moral strength and moral beauty.” The monument, said Anderson, stood not for “a record of civil strife, but as a perpetual protest against whatever is low and sordid in our public and private objects.”’

Clearly slavery didn’t qualify as “low and sordid” in the minds of the massive crowd. But as newspapers noted across America, the statue forced the entire nation to explain away Lee’s alleged greatness as millions came to worship at the altar of the Confederate general.

In its own legal documents before the court, the current state of Virginia wrote:

“Symbols matter, and the Virginia of today can no longer honor a racist system that enslaved millions of people. Installing a grandiose monument to the Lost Cause was wrong in 1890, and demanding that it stay up forever is wrong now.”

Related: Virginia Museum Will Lead Efforts to Reimagine Richmond Avenue Once Lined With Confederate Monuments Smithsonian Magazine

MacKenzie Scott's HBCU Giving Contrasts Starkly With Historical White Funders

By Tyrone McKinley Freeman, Associate Professor of Philanthropic Studies, Director of Undergraduate Programs, Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, IUPUI. First published on The Conversation

Novelist and billionaire philanthropist MacKenzie Scott has so far given at least US$560 million to 23 historically Black colleges and universities. These donations are part of a bid she announced in 2019 to quickly dedicate most of her fortune to charity.

Scott’s gifts, including the $6 million she donated to Tougaloo College in Mississippi and the $45 million she gave North Carolina A&T University, vary in size but nearly all of the colleges and universities describe this funding as “historic.” For many, it was the largest single donation they had ever received from an individual donor.

Scott, previously married to Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, is not making a splash just because of the size of her donations. She has an unusually unrestrictive get-out-of-the-way approach.

“I gave each a contribution and encouraged them to spend it on whatever they believe best serves their efforts,” Scott wrote in a July 2020 blog post.

She sees the standard requirements that universities and other organizations report to funders on their progress as burdensome distractions. Instead of negotiating detailed agreements before making a gift, she works with a team of advisers to stealthily vet a wide array of nonprofits, colleges and universities from afar before surprising them with her unprecedented multimillion-dollar gifts that come without any strings attached.

Scott is also supporting students of color through donations to the United Negro College Fund and the Thurgood Marshall College Fund, which give HBCU students scholarships, and by supporting many other colleges and universities that enroll large numbers of minority students.

Her approach sharply contrasts with how many wealthy white donors have interacted with Black-serving nonprofits, including HBCUs, in the past. As a historian of philanthropy, I have studied the paternalism of white funders, including those who helped many of these schools open their doors.

HBCU Origins

The first HBCUs were founded in Northern states before the Civil War, including Cheyney and Lincoln universities in Pennsylvania and Wilberforce University in Ohio. After the war, most HBCUs were established in Southern states. These institutions were lifelines for Black Americans seeking higher education during decades of Jim Crow segregation that locked them out of other colleges and universities. (Disclosure: I earned my bachelor’s degree at Lincoln University.)

Although many white philanthropists made large gifts to these schools, their support was fraught with prejudice. Initially, white funders pushed for HBCUs to emphasize vocational training, then called “industrial education,” such as blacksmithing, printing and shoemaking, over more intellectual pursuits.

White philanthropists including Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller had poured millions from their fortunes into the proliferation of Black industrial schools by the early 20th century. The HBCUs Hampton University in Virginia and Tuskegee University in Alabama, which received donations from Scott, were leading models of industrial education for decades.

Black students during a class on the assembly and repair of telephones at Hampton Institute (1899). US Library of Congress.

The vocational curriculum at these schools was promoted as preparing Black students to be skilled laborers and academic teachers. During this era, however, most graduates worked as unskilled laborers or vocational teachers.

White Southerners overwhelmingly approved of this arrangement, which left many HBCU grads on the bottom rung of society rather than making them educated citizens. Emphasizing industrial education at HBCUs preserved the superior economic status of white Americans and the racist system of segregation. But African Americans’ educational aspirations required much more.

W.E.B. Du Bois, a prominent Black intellectual, was a leading critic of the funding HBCUs got from wealthy whites. He said: “Education is not and should not be a private philanthropy; it is a public service and whenever it merely becomes a gift of the rich it is in danger.”

In 1904, the HBCU leader Mary McLeod Bethune, founder of Florida’s Daytona Normal and Industrial School for Negro Girls – now Bethune Cookman University – felt this pressure. She placed “industrial” in her school’s name to attract white funding. But she sought to give Black students a liberal arts education that she believed would support their full citizenship.

Decades later, the sociologist Charles S. Johnson served as Fisk University’s first Black president, starting in 1946. He sought to turn that Tennessee HBCU, founded in 1866, into a powerhouse of Black liberal arts education in partnership with white philanthropists and foundations rather than covertly.

HBCU leaders have, in short, faced a predicament for generations: When rich white donors offer big donations, can the money truly be used to support Black educational interests and goals?

Prejudiced Backlash

When HBCUs secured funding early on, that money was often jeopardized because of bigotry.

In 1887, for example, the Georgia state Legislature withdrew $8,000, worth approximately $220,000 today, in critical annual funding from Atlanta University. The HBCU, founded in 1865, had flouted Southern norms by allowing whites and Blacks to share campus facilities, which white politicians did not appreciate.

Later, the school embraced a liberal arts curriculum, bucking the more vocational emphasis white segregationists preferred.

In response, many white philanthropists withdrew their donations.

Despite that challenge, Atlanta University persevered, eventually merging with Clark College. And so it is historically significant that Scott gave Clark Atlanta University $15 million in 2020 to use as it sees fit. The school is using the money for academic innovation, infrastructure and scholarships, and to build up its endowment.

Undercutting Black Medical Schools

In 1908 there were seven Black medical schools in the U.S. By 1921, following a sustained attack on those institutions, only two remained: Meharry Medical College in Nashville and Howard University in Washington, D.C.

The loss of those schools began in 1910, when Andrew Carnegie’s foundation funded a report by educator Abraham Flexner. Part of a larger reform movement to standardize medical training, Flexner’s study recommended the closure of five Black medical schools. It led white funders to sever their support.

At the time, there were extensive problems with medical education across the board in the U.S. There were no standards for curriculum or instruction. But Black medical schools’ particular problems – poor funding, insufficient faculty and inadequate facilities – were exacerbated by Jim Crow segregation and condescension from the establishment.

Flexner’s site visits were incredibly short. He castigated Black doctors as a group without interviewing them. He recommended support for Meharry and Howard to ensure that at least some Black doctors would be able to care for Black patients in segregated hospitals and prevent the spread of disease to the white population.

Carnegie’s and Rockefeller’s foundations were initially reluctant to support the two surviving medical schools in implementing Flexner’s suggested reforms. Their subsequent funding ebbed and flowed irregularly. Scholars have estimated that the Black medical schools closed after Flexner’s damning report would have produced 35,000 Black doctors over the past century.

For decades HBCUs such as Xavier University in Louisiana, which received $20 million from Scott in 2020, have been top producers of Black graduates who become doctors.

A Continuing Problem

A long-term shortage of Black doctors remains a critical public health issue today, reflecting the sustained underfunding of HBCUs.

For example, Maryland’s HBCUs won a settlement against the state in 2021 totaling $577 million intended to remedy decades of underfunding compared with the state’s predominantly white colleges and universities.

Scott funded three of those public institutions: Bowie State, Morgan State and University of Maryland Eastern Shore in 2020.

A review completed in 2021 of Tennessee State University, another HBCU, found the state underfunded it by an estimated $544 million compared with the school’s white counterparts, dating back to 1950.

HBCUs Today

Today there are about 100 HBCUs, half of which are public institutions. They enroll roughly 300,000 students and award nearly 50,000 degrees annually.

Seventy percent of HBCU students are eligible for Pell grants, making the schools critical for first-generation and low-income students. Although they represent only 3% of all degree-granting institutions, HBCUs confer 13% of all bachelor’s degrees earned by Black Americans.

Today, a disproportionate share of HBCU grads become doctors – making these schools a vital on-ramp into the middle class for students of color.

And yet HBCUs are financially fragile. The 10 largest HBCU endowments total $2 billion, just 1% of the $200 billion held collectively by the 10 predominantly white colleges and universities with the largest endowments.

Despite the financial challenges these schools have faced, HBCU graduates include some of America’s most prominent figures, including Martin Luther King Jr., Vice President Kamala Harris, multimedia mogul Oprah Winfrey, Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, filmmaker Spike Lee and Nobel Prize-winning novelist Toni Morrison.

There’s no way to know the full toll endured by HBCUs and the Black community as a whole from long-term underfunding and donor hostility. In my view, it will take decades of Scott-style giving for HBCUs to recover what has been lost in time, compound interest and impact over generations.