There are many schisms within the American Left. Almost everyone understands this to be true, but it’s rarely discussed or debated. Why? In my thinking, primarily because many writers and activists are scared to openly, honestly and publicly debate the internal problems of the Left.
In some ways, this position makes sense, as leftists are constantly repressed and misrepresented by the press, conservatives, governments, corporations, Hollywood, etc. Why add to the ongoing onslaught of criticism leftists routinely endure? Yet, we should never be fearful of a proper critique and debate.
Indeed, recent events at the Netroots Nation conference in Phoenix, Arizona, highlight internal schisms liberals and leftists can’t afford to ignore. In the end, the goal should always be a more united movement, or united movements, not fractured groups or organizations incapable of producing real-world results. Unfortunately, the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protest at Netroots did not help build solidarity. In fact, it did quite the opposite.
Understanding Racism
Through conversations with my dear friend, Kim Scipes, I’ve long thought about racism in two ways, or from two perspectives.
On the one level, there’s personal/individual forms of racism. What does personal racism look like in the real world? Someone calling another person a derogatory term; violently attacking someone based on the color of their skin; harboring prejudice thoughts about people of color; and other forms of subjective discrimination.
Personal racism is easier to detect and address than systemic, or institutional racism. Indeed, people can change on an individual level. Their thoughts and behaviors can be altered with discipline and time. However, it’s quite a different task to get them to think about the ways in which the dominant systems in society produce and reproduce horrific forms of discrimination.
Consequently, institutional/systemic forms of racism are harder for people to comprehend and address. Without question, most white people, unless they have a very specific educational or personal background, simply don’t understand the legacies of slavery, the Civil War, the KKK, policing, Jim Crow, segregation, the prison industrial complex, the war on drugs, and so on.
Many times, white people see these phenomena as subjective forms of racism. In other words, they would argue that their parents didn’t own slaves or that their family members weren’t in the KKK. They see slavery as a subjective choice made by individual white people, not a system of governments, security apparatuses and economic mechanisms that codified slavery, thus developing an institution of oppression and domination, an institution which laid the foundation for modern capitalism and white supremacy. Moreover, most white people do not understand the histories and legacies of colonialism or Western Civilization. If they have learned about these things, it was most likely in a required college class.
All that being said, in the US, there is a long history of white liberals and progressives addressing personal racism, and wholeheartedly rejecting it, yet failing to adequately respond to institutional racism. Obviously, this dynamic has to change. And to be honest, I think many white liberals and progressives are willing to have this discussion.
Addressing Systemic Racism
When thinking about racism and political organizing, many questions come up. Some of them include: How can we get people who don’t think about race at all to think about race? How can we get people who are thinking about personal racism to also address systemic forms of racism? And how can we get people who already comprehend these things to work together more effectively?
Let’s talk about the first question: How can we get people who don’t think about race at all to think about race? This is possibly the most difficult question of the bunch. And honestly, I don’t have any clear answers.
However, the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement has made headway, as more Americans are thinking and talking about race than during any period since the 1960s. Likewise, the 2008 election of President Barrack Obama has produced both interesting and horrendous conversations about racism in the US. In many ways, people who don’t normally think or talk about race have been forced to do so.
Thus, the time is ripe for even more critical conversations, as many ordinary people are aware that something is drastically wrong in the US when more black people are incarcerated than were enslaved during certain periods in US history. Further, images of young black people being murdered by the police have caused white people to seriously reflect on racism in the US. In short, the valve is opened and it’s not closing anytime soon.
This leads us to the second question: How can we get people who are already thinking critically about race to engage in the process of deconstructing racist institutions? This question is equally difficult to answer, for even the most engaged activists fail to understand how to develop a movement capable of dismantling systems of oppression.
That includes myself: I’m constantly going to events and actions, but always unsure of how said events or actions fit into a broader vision and strategy to build a different society. To put differently, I’ve long been interested in changing the system, but I’ve never been a part of a movement or organization that was capable of performing such a task, or even remotely close to building the power necessary to reconstruct society in a more just, peaceful and equitable fashion.
For instance, what would it really look like to abolish the modern prison system in the US? Of course, this question leads to more questions. For example, how would such a campaign be incorporated into broader campaigns addressing economic inequality, environmental destruction or militarism?
Would we attempt to organize prison guards? Would we organize lawyers in the criminal justice system? How would we organize prisoners? What’s the best way to organize the families and communities most effected by mass incarceration? What would we do about child molesters, rapists and mass murderers? Could we find uses for the existing prisons and their infrastructures? How could we help transition millions of people from prison life to civilian life? What sort of manpower and financial capacity would it take to achieve these tasks?
Right now, we have movements that are capable of highlighting issues, but incapable of effectively remedying them. In other words, there are movements, like the BLM movement, who is getting the word out and pressuring public officials, but is incapable of challenging racist institutions, or even implementing meaningful reforms. In order to do so, BLM activists and other organizations in the US seeking racial justice must build long-lasting friendships, bonds and working relationships with progressive groups, many of which are primarily white.
Building Better Movements
This brings us to my last question: How can we get people who are already engaged in movement building to work together more effectively? As I watched the YouTube clip of BLM protestors at the Netroots Nation conference, my immediate reaction was, “How is this action strategic?”
However, let’s back up, and let me be clear: I understand why radical black activists are frustrated. They are virtually absent from the progressive and leftist media and organizational landscape. Other than a few liberal institutions, I was completely unaware of any national movement or political organization that represented black interests and focused primarily on black political issues prior to BLM. Hence, there’s good reason the activists on stage at the Netroots Nation conference were crying, emotional and angry.
That being said, emotional outbursts and symbolic actions do not supplement strategic thinking. If BLM hopes to be effective, they must connect with the sort of people who are attending conferences like Netroots Nation. Personally, I’ve never been to a Netroots conference, but I have plenty of activist friends who have, and do, and they are great folks who are committed to many progressive political causes.
Once again, this brings me to the question: How was that action strategic? Did it help build the movement, or not? In some ways, we’ll have to wait and see how things develop in the coming months, but for now, I don’t think the action was helpful, or in any way, shape or form, strategic.
Just because an action makes a certain group of people, in this case about 75 BLM activists, feel empowered, does not mean that it was worthwhile or productive in nature. The next day, the trending Twitter hashtag was #Berniesoblack. Many activists found this amusing. However, doesn’t this raise the question of who’s our enemy, and who’s not our enemy? All too often I get the feeling that leftists and radical activists view liberals and progressives as actual or potential enemies, as opposed to actual or potential allies.
To me, this doesn’t make sense. It does, however, make sense for BLM activists to engage in serious, critical and lengthy discussions with Sanders’ supporters and campaign workers. If BLM activists wish to connect with the tens of thousands of decent people who are currently organizing around the Sanders campaign, I suggest they open avenues of dialogue. Hell, it would be great if they had an opportunity to speak with Sanders himself. Would that be so bad for the movement?
Moreover, BLM activists can set up their own conferences, and they have. Or, they can get involved in the organizing processes of ongoing progressive and leftist conferences, such as Left Forum or Netroots Nation, to name a couple. Both of those options make more sense than protesting Sanders and slandering him online, for those actions do nothing to build solidarity or cohesion.
In the end, it’s unclear how serious people should take the BLM movement. After all, it’s still in its infant stages. While BLM has made significant headway, it lacks a coherent vision and strategy to achieve its demands. Indeed, the more organized BLM becomes, the more likely people will be inclined to join the BLM movement. Right now, many people are unaware of what those demands entail. Therefore, BLM activists often appear to be simply protesting and reacting to injustice, as opposed to proactively providing a vision for the future.
If there is to be a future for the BLM movement, and if the largely white supporters of Bernie Sanders hope to achieve their populist goals, these groups must work together. Indeed, I’m willing to bet that the majority of white allies who showed up to Ferguson and Baltimore (this would include myself), also support Sanders’ run for US President.
Most importantly, this isn’t the only racial/ethnic divide progressive movements in the US must deal with, as Latino and black voters overwhelmingly support Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign over Bernie Sanders’ bid. Similarly, the vast majority of black voters in Chicago supported Rahm Emanuel over Chuy Garcia in the Windy City’s recent mayoral election. Why are black communities supporting Democratic establishment candidates over their more progressive challengers? And what are white progressives doing, or not doing, to reach out to these communities?
Moreover, the environmental movement in the US is largely composed of indigenous and white activists. And the antiwar movement, at least as long as I’ve been involved (2006), is disproportionately white and old. Conversely, the BLM movement is primarily young and black. While the Occupy movement was primarily young and white. These are the dynamics that progressives must address if we hope to be successful in the future.
For now, I don’t think bashing each other online is helpful, nor is it productive. If BLM activists and organizers wish to build a robust and serious movement, they will actively reach out to the white progressives who are supporting Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign. Similarly, if white activists who support Sanders are interested in building a diverse and effective movement, they will actively reach out to BLM activists.
I don’t think any of this is controversial, or difficult, but it does require activists and organizers from different movements and constituencies to communicate and organize with each other in productive ways.
ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.
Donate
5 Comments
Of course this is an old article but in answer to “how was this strategic”, I think the answer is that BLM has gotten itself on the radar with Sanders as well as made its voice heard in a forum that was receptive. So I think it was strategic.
I’m not worried about Sanders’ ability to listen and stake out new ground with BLM. He already has. My concern is with us, and with BLM and every other progressive organization. Can we rise to what this campaign demands of us?
What it demands it that our organizations develop an electoral capacity rooted in precincts, ward and CDs. It can be PDA or any reasonable facsimile, but we must organize base community political instruments that connect an electoral insurgency with social insurgencies (to borrow from Marta Harnecker.)
PDA, and its platform, is an instrument that takes the form of a popular front vs finance capital, war and the right. They are the main, organized, grassroots force that got Bernie to run, and now is growing through its efforts to get him elected. It has no official ties to the DNC, but it does work closely with the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a group founded by Bernie. It’s aim is to push its platform and candidates against those of the finance capital factions as far as it can go.
Some on the left will make the most of this; but others, wishing they were in a different time or alternate country, will still not be happy. But PDA is there; you can deal with it or ignore it, as you choose. Or make something similar. But WE have to do it; there’s no waiting on ‘the campaign’ to do it. They already have their hands full.
I am incredibly relieved to read this piece.I am viscerally moved by the BLM movement and the history that led to its formation. I am also deeply flummoxed by how to be an ally who can support moving this energy of understandable outrage into an alliance with the most exciting candidate for POTUS that I can remember for decades.
I am for BLM, and for Bernie Sanders. As a middle-aged white woman, I have very little idea of how to move ahead. I deeply believe that Bernie Sanders’ success must include alliances with the Black and Latino communities. He needs them, and I deeply hope he will recognize and articulate that to the BLM organizers. I also believe that BLM would benefit greatly from working with white progressives who have decades of experience with organizing for social change.
While Dr. Martin Luther King Jr was first and foremost a champion for the people of his race, at the time of his death, he was putting his life on the line for sanitation workers–the working poor.And here, we find the common ground for Black Lives Matter and Senator Sanders: economic injustice.It is a battle.worth fighting for both camps. We can’t make change by associating only with those the most similar to us.By sharing our stories and backgrounds, we will find common ground. Just as a fabric needs both the warp and weft to be strong, so the cloth of the social justice movement needs the diversity of individuals to withstand those who have everything to lose in a move to end oppression.
Thank you for helping me find a few words.for the complex playing field that has emerged.in the USA. Write on!
As long as stereotypes are being focused on, let’s get real. Most environmentalists are women. Most anti-war people are women. Don’t leave out gender. Most poor people are women. Most single parents are women. Black people have a lot to complain about — SO DO WOMEN.
Yet interrupting politicians on stage is rude and counterproductive and does no good for anyone, IF those politicians are on your side. I would never do this to Bernie Sanders. I would like to see this done to Republicans. They are the cultural enemy, not Sanders, not any Democrat.
There is so much of value in this article. As a white supporter of both Bernie Sanders AND the Black Lives Matter movement, I am disheartened by the divide already created by one incident. Whether or not the interruption by 75 BLM activists was the best way to try to begin much needed communication, moving ahead with that communication is what matters most now. I believe the following paragraph from the article speaks to what we must aspire to:
“For now, I don’t think bashing each other online is helpful, nor is it productive. If BLM activists and organizers wish to build a robust and serious movement, they will actively reach out to the white progressives who are supporting Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign. Similarly, if white activists who support Sanders are interested in building a diverse and effective movement, they will actively reach out to BLM activists.”
Thank you for an article that I hope will be given thought by people who come to the discussion from all directions.