Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers

The 1960s marked the beginning of the United States governments War on Poverty. In an effort to address and correct the problem of poverty, the federal government used grassroots organizations to help lessen the ever growing racial tensions in American society. One such platform was Community Action Programs. Tom Wolfes Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers, examines the effectiveness of these programs in San Francisco. The book delves into the tactics of minority groups and how they manipulate the Office of Equal Opportunity in this city. Wolfe presents the Office of Equal Opportunity as corrupt, and shows how easy it was for minority communities to exploit them. The groups competed against one another in order to receive funding for their own community. That is, Samoans, Filipinos, Blacks, Chinese, etc. all used different forms of intimidation in order to receive the governments money. The leaders of these groups would then take the money and keep all or most of it for themselves, while the intended recipients remained impoverished. The Mau-Mauers would use the white flak catchers fear and use it to their advantage. Of the Mau-Mauers, some of the most successful were the militant looking blacks and the enormous Samoans. The militant groups, most of which were led by a man named Chaser, would simply enter the office in silence, and surround The Man until he showed his vulnerability. His weakness would be exposed with a

scrawny smile, and then the group would leave as quickly as they had arrived knowing that their mission was accomplished. The objective of the group was to shake them up, to scare the business men into giving that particular group money. (Wolfe, pp. 86-89) The fact that the bureaucrats smiled showed that they were fearful, that their manhood had been tested and that he was in fact a chickenshit. (Wolfe, p.96) This would eventually mean that the grants would be distributed to the most feared groups. While blacks often used militancy and the fear of the unknown with the bureaucrats, the Samoans used their sheer size to intimidate the bureaucrats. In one meeting the Polynesian men bring along their Tiki canes and bang them on the floor in unison. This is a reminder to the bureaucrat that he could easily be beaten up by these men, thus causing him more pressure to adhere to the groups demands. (Wolfe,pp. 96-98) One man would simply bring weapons such as knives and guns to the office, and claim that he retrieved them from the neighborhood, and the bureaucrats had no choice but to hand over money. (Wolfe,p.84) The main job of the bureaucrats became to take the abuse of these men, and soon there was no mediation, it was clear who was in charge. It was not the men in Washington that controlled who received the money; it was the Mau-Mauers, and their abilities to intimidate The Man until they received their share. The corruption in the system led to many people abusing the money meant to help the community, and it often gave power to the leaders of the Mau-Mau and gave them prestige in a community for having money rather than spending said money on

community programs. The administration did not have a way to hold these groups accountable, nor could they accurately measure the results of the program, which ultimately led to the programs demise. Wolfes commentary is not largely focused on the minority group although they play a large role in his essay. Instead it is the white middle class that he appears to be criticizing the most, and not because they are trying to appease these groups by throwing money at the poverty issue, but how their fake concern and understanding often blinded them in their attempts to fix the situation. That is, the white middle class appeared to be concerned with gangs and violence in the ghettos, but the bureaucrats gave money to the very people they were attempting to rid the city of. They were so blinded by the fear of retaliation, that they gave money to people who did not share it with the community and may have very well used it in promoting more violence. By far his best illustration of this fabricated understanding is when a teacher reads aloud Soul on Ice, which is the commentary of Eldridge Cleaver. The white students in the class think that this passage has revealed the struggle of all impoverished blacks, and that they were in need of a revolution. But, one of the three black students in the class raises his hand and destroys this vision when he berates the book. He shows that white people do not understand the struggles of black people and he in a sense brings them down a notch. He asserts that these students have no idea about who the real leaders of the ghettos are, and that they are ridiculous for thinking that they are so enlightened on The Black Man. Their

condescending attitude, as displayed in the classroom carried over into the Office of Equal Opportunity and thus allowed groups to take advantage of the system. (Wolfe, pp.109-111) Wolfes ability to find humor in this situation makes the book a success. He is able to draw attention to this failed program, and point out the abuses suffered by these bureaucrats, while at the same time holding them accountable for being so easily intimidated into supplying money to those who did not need it. The individual experiences along with his amazing portraits of the characters, the author allows the reader to place themselves in to the time period and better understand the context in which these men were so easily manipulated because white men feared minority groups. The one problem with this essay is the lack of clear definition and explanation of what mau-mauing was in the 1960s. Through the essay, the reader realizes that mau-mauing was in fact the intimidation tactics used by the individual communities and that the bureaucrats simply serve as a punching bag for such groups, but there are no clear definitions. It may have been helpful if Wolfe would have explained where the term Mau-Mauing derived from or how the term was transformed to describe the Community Action Programs. The same apply to the term flak catcher. There are no concise definitions, and it appears that it means that the bureaucrats were simply the guard between the minority groups and Washington. But, in not defining the term properly, it causes the reader to overlook the importance of the term in that flak catchers have the ability to take criticisms

and make them work for their employers advantage. Such an example can be found when the flak catcher refers to giving his paycheck to the groups as a drop in the bucket.(Wolfe, pp.99-100) This ability to leave the threatening groups speechless sheds light on the white mans smug feelings about minority groups. But, this can be overlooked easily by readers because there are no concise definitions in the essays. Overall, Wolfes writing style made this read an enjoyable and humorous one. His ability to expose the corruption and ineptitude of the men involved with the Office of Equal Opportunity caused the failure of this project. While the program appears to be one of good intentions, it was unable to affectively deal with poverty in San Francisco and may have had adverse side effects. Wolfe shows that corruption was prevalent in both the minority Mau-Mauers and the middle class white flak catchers.