|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Civil & Human Rights |
|
Thoughts Of An Angry Black Man |
Current rating: 2 |
by repost via Muwata
(No verified email address) |
15 Jul 2003
|
|
I was wrong about AWARE. |
AWARE's racism discussion Sunday, 29 June left me utterly disappointed and
confused. Disappointed because the discussion is indicative of a pervasive
attitude among most whites that race is a problem that only affects people of
color; confused because antiracism is in your acronym, yet there is strong
opposition to fulfilling that part of AWARE. I'm also confused because I thought the
members of AWARE were progressives. I could not believe some of the comments
that came out of the mouths of so-called progressives at the meeting, but I'll
get to that later.
I joined AWARE initially because I thought the members understood the
interconnection between war -both domestic and international-and racism. I thought
AWARE understood that in order to effect change, one must think globally and act
locally. I thought AWARE understood the connection between the police state
which exist in most chocolate cities in this country and the military state
which exist in most Third World countries by so-called Western democracies. I
thought AWARE understood the connection between American Indian reservations and
Palestinian occupations. I thought AWARE understood the connection between
skewed unemployment among the working and poor classes in America and sweatshops
and slave labor in Third World countries.
I was wrong about AWARE.
I also joined AWARE because I truly believe in multiracial and multiracial
exchange. And I still believe despite my negative experience with AWARE.
Some people in AWARE are deluded into thinking that the antiracism part has
been fulfilled. But as a member of a beleaguered, oppressed people, I can say
that AWARE has not. Having speakers to discuss racism in a forum is not dealing
with racism. Glancing references to racism in documentation is not dealing
with racism. How is AWARE to "end racism" when the group is too scare to talk
about it? How can AWARE fight against imperialism and colonialism when your
mindset is similar to the oppressor?
Not only has AWARE given the race issue a low priority, but also AWARE has
given imperialism, colonialism, and globalization a low priority. This group has
avoided serious critical analysis of the aforementioned issues lest sounding
too philosophical, which leads me to the conclusion that AWARE is not a group
of progressives, but rather a group of dilettantes and hobbyists. AWARE has
been reduced to being baiters of the Bush Administration.
As for the comments made by so-called progressives at the meeting, Morton
Brussel made the comment that war is when you drop bombs on people. Although war
can be defined in terms of armed conflict, it is not the only definition
available. War can also be defined as any active hostility, contention, or
struggle. Therefore, the attack on affirmative action, economic and wealth inequality,
racial profiling, police brutality, inadequate health care, poor education, a
burgeoning population of people of color in the prison industrial complex,
etc., can be seen as a war. The antiwar movement has failed to recognize the
continuing war on people of color. White activists continue to ignore the issues
which speak to the experiences of people of color.
Another comment made-I don't remember his name-was that there was no black
response to September 11th or the war in Iraq. Representative Barbara Lee, a
black woman, who was the only House member that voted against a resolution
authorizing President Bush to use force against anyone associated with September
11th terrorist attacks? Lee also spoke out against using force in Iraq. Remember
Representative Elijah Cummings, chairperson of the Congressional Black Caucus,
who tried unsuccessfully to meet with President Bush to address the war?
Cornel West, Michael Eric Dyson, Angela Davis, Danny Glover, Harry Belafonte,
Alice Walker, Ossie Davis and Ruby Dee, and countless other black people spoke out
against the war. Black organizations including but not limited to the
Congressional Black Caucus, NAACP, the Urban League, the Black Radical Congress, BAMN
(By Any Means Necessary), and Black Voices for Peace also spoke out against
the war.
Even though blacks are much more likely to oppose the war that whites-three
out of five blacks are against it, compared to one out of five whites,
according to polls-seemingly black people were underrepresented in the antiwar
demonstrations. This lack of attendance I believe is due to blacks rallying over
other causes such as affirmative action. Instead of focusing on lack of black
involvement in the antiwar protests, this question begs an answer: Why are whites
underrepresented in demonstrations for social change led by people of color?
Indifference to domestic issues was another comment made during the racism
discussion. This comment is clearly a contradiction because indifference to
domestic concerns implies indifference to international concerns. How can one not
care about racism in our front and backyards and only care about the racism in
another country? How can one not care about police repression in chocolate
cities in this country and care about military repression in Afghanistan and
Iraq?
It is patent that AWARE neither has the imagination, understanding,
motivation, nor courage to wrestle with racism from without and from within. And for
this reason, I will no longer associate myself with AWARE in any capacity. I
cannot in good conscience be aligned with a group too cowardice to talk about or
confront their own racism.
I think it is long overdue to change the acronym to an anti-war effort (AWE)
or an anti-Bush effort (ABE), because this group is not serious about race.
Holding on to an acronym which lacks substance because it sounds good or
including race briefly in a mission statement does not make your group progressive;
it merely makes AWARE hobbyists.
I was told that I should be patient with this group. And my response to that
statement is my patience has run out. How long will it take whites to
understand that race is their problem, too? After 244 years of slavery, 81 years of
Jim Crow, and 51 years of black people becoming strange fruit on trees every 2
days, I think it is rather insensitive to require my patience.
I was also told that I should stay in the group to be of guidance to hapless
white people in AWARE. My answer to that question is this: I refuse to be
white people's nigger. In other words, I'm not going to be a token. If AWARE needs
me to inform white folk of the fact that we live in a racist society and that
we need to do something about it, then your group definitely doesn't get it.
For those individuals who are sincere about dealing with racism-you know who
you are-nothing is tying you to AWARE. However, if you decide to stay with the
group, continue to put the mirror in their faces. Forced them to confront
their own racist sensibilities.
Caveat: Do not believe that AWARE is an anarchist group, for there is
definitely order in the chaos. Keep a close eye on Al, David, and Morton. It seems
that they are the true power behind the throne. Please do not allow them to mold
AWARE in their image. Down with patriarchy in AWARE!
In closing, before you wonder why people of color are not joining AWARE,
remember this: A black man was willing to work with white so-called progressives
and your group let him down.
|
Comments
|
Re: Thoughts Of An Angry Black Man |
by anon
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
27 Jul 2003
Modified: 12:28:32 PM |
Well, whew... that's heavy. Obviously it took a while for you to come to these conclusions. Your departure is a loss, for sure. And I think I kind-of understand your frustrations, as they happened to you.
Yes, there is a natural, unspoken hierarchy in AWARE. I've noticed it, and the power struggles that occur over decisions or proposals at the meetings, are disappointing to say the least. I've seen the group waste entire meetings literally arguing over one detail. The struggles are no doubt associated with specific individuals, and is why I lost interest. It did seem like a philosophy club, or intellectual debate, too often.
I think what you observed with attitudes and procedures, is a result of this University town. The culture here rewards and prizes intellectual ability and status. I've been involved in progressive groups outside of AWARE, and the atmosphere seems to be common. Lots of stubborn, ego-driven, individualistic, ultra-reasoned debates, and not enough real progress. I'm having to adjust my expectations and style to accomodate this.
At AWARE, there was often an insular, kind-of "it's us against the world" attitude, and "my ideal is the best and most true..."
I can't help but feel sometimes that with AWARE, and a few people in the IMC, that they are involved because their status, or standing, or reputation, or personal satisfaction in these org's is more important than succeeding in the causes that can produce measurable results. And I understand that the process is tedious and detailed by nature.
This isn't to say that these org's aren't valuable, and a good thing, but the internal politics can drain valuable energy and focus away from the goals!
And the goals are often nebulous. I'm back to talking about AWARE only. I would run the meetings with a rigid schedule, timetable, goals, opp's for vote, and more participation via the 'Net, vs. people having to attend physically.
I dunno, I hung around for a while in the Fall, saw "members" sleeping during meetings, members coming 45 minutes late, and all kinds of petty power struggles. And I rarely felt like much was accomplished. There seem to be too many closed minds, or a lack of effective leadership, or something. Also, 25 people attend, but only about ten consistently volunteer for more chores and projects.
I know volunteerism for serious and emotional issues is a horse of a diffent color.
But I would hope that you can come to see things in this way: not that many of the AWARE members are indifferent or insensitive to racism or your voice, just that the collective attitude is not a good match for your level of passion. Obviously I can never know all the details of your experience, but I think it's unfair to portray many there in the way you have. It's not that they're against you, just that they're not on exactly the same page as you, or don't care in a way that will bring them to your page.
Ease up man, they're not bad people, just people. |
|
Re: Thoughts Of An Angry Black Man |
by anon
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
27 Jul 2003
Modified: 12:50:25 PM |
I would also like to add, that it may be that most org's like AWARE have a similar atmosphere. It may be pefectly natural. And it may be that "black struggle" groups find it easier to focus on common goals, or cooperate, or feel a more natural unity. Just speculating.
I'm most envious of progressive groups that cooperate, are efficient, and produce results. It's exactly how the "conservative movement" has come to rule, and why the "liberal movement" has floundered about. Organization, defined goals, and focus.
In defense of lib's/prog's though, it isn't in our nature to accept hierarchy. We are decentralized and communal by nature. I know I resist authority automatically.
But operating more like the conservative movement is exactly how Rome was able to dominate a large portion of the world. Organization is the key. |
|
