By The Alice in Not-So-Wonderland Collective
On April 15th, three of us anti-authoritarians from CT decided to mosey on down to the Tea Party and give it a look-see. We did our best to go over there with no preconceived notions and what follows are some of our thoughts—from Jabberwocky, Cheshire Cat, and Alice Volcano (who graciously took pics for us!). Remember, this is CT—a blue, blue state as the popular distinctions go, so we’re not sure how representative this is. Also, we each have our own takes on this. As we reflected on the Tea Party, we also reflected on how piss poor radicals have done at building a movement. So shout outs to student occupiers, West Coast anarchists showing killer cops what’s what, Hunter College hooligans scheming to liberate space, Chicago workers who decided to take their workplace a while back, and anyone everywhere doing what they can to fight capitalism and the state, create alternatives to them, or creating spaces where we’re safe from all of the bad shit we inherit by being born into a world organized by hierarchy, coercion, and control.
By Jabberwocky
Cheshire Cat and I were just kind of quietly standing by when one Tea Party fella remarked to two of his friends, “Look over there. (He points over at the small group of counter-protesters). It’s the liberal, communist, fascists. I hear they’re members of the Working Families Party. (They weren’t. They were anarchists). Funny thing about them? None of ‘em work and none of ‘em have families!”
His friends looked pretty amused by this and they all had a laugh.
I guess all in all, I was pretty underwhelmed by the Tea Party protests. It has all the markers of the kind of right-wing populist movement that might frighten me, but it seemed pretty toothless on the lawn of the Capitol Building in Hartford. The people I talked to tried to be nice, but were almost completely incapable of any kind of intellectual honesty. They constantly referred to Obama as a “socialist” (he’s not), a “fascist” (he’s not), a “communist” (he’s not). For the record, I’m not a fan of Obama, or any politician really, but the discourse around these events are so hyper-alienating.
Now the same is true of the “other side” (reads: “mirror image of the tea partiers”). One man was carrying a sign that said “Teabaggers=KKK” (they’re not), for example. I likewise remember cries that Bush was a “Nazi” (he’s not), etc. at anti-war rallies in the past.
I guess what struck me the most was the ridiculous posturing and abuse of discourse on both sides. It just seems like any honest political disagreement is impossible under these circumstances. How can I make an appeal for socialism when folks have been led to believe that a health care policy that is more modest than Richard Nixon’s (!!!) is evidence of a communist conspiracy? There’s really no point. However, the demographic of the Tea Party, according to polls, is generally upper-middle class white folks—not exactly the constituency I typically try to reach out to. And, after all, at the same time as the Tea Party, nursing home workers in Connecticut were striking (it’s still happening, so get out and support!). The only conclusion I could really come to is this:
There are better ways for any of us to spend our time than going to Tea Parties—even people like me who are attracted to train wrecks and events that give us idiot shivers.
But, more importantly, perhaps we could have a return to civil discourse and a shred of honesty in political debate. These sorts of non-arguments are the stuff that leftist debates (especially on the internet) are almost entirely made of—particularly anarchists. One of my friends is constantly saying that we need to be more “generous” with each other. I think that’s true. Perhaps we CAN take a lesson from the Tea Partiers, then: We could resolve not to abuse the English language and do mental gymnastics in order to paint anyone we disagree with as an “enemy” instead of someone we just have a disagreement with. If we’re not careful, we might even start to sound human, compassionate, and like folks that people just might want to be in a movement with!
Now that would be something for American radicals!
By Cheshire Cat
I don’t know any Tea Party members and have never been to a Tea Party event, so I had to see for myself what all the commotion is about. Noam Chomsky has recently said that the Tea Party in its present form is a failure of the left and that they (the tea partiers) have some legitimate gripes, so a couple of friends and I decided to go and see if we could find some common ground.
Walking up the hill to the steps of the Capitol, slightly nervous and unsure of what to expect, I was relieved to find that nobody paid much attention to us even though I thought we clearly looked out of place (under 35, tattooed, wearing black tee shirts). The first thing I noticed was Holy crap, there were a lot of flags! They were mostly American and Gadsden flags (coiling snake on a yellow background), however the flags that most caught my attention were the ones on the main stage, a row of them that had the tops of the poles adorned with gold crucifixes- which was a little creepy IMHO. Also, there were less cops than I expected (around 6 that I counted) which, for an event that drew a few hundred people, was odd considering that an hour earlier I was at a workers strike with about fifty people and there were just as many cops.
Yes, the crowd was 99% white but the same could be said for most anti-war rallies I’ve been to at the Capitol. Throughout an hour of wading through the crowd, I had the chance to speak with three or four people. They were obviously right leaning and although many of them claim to be independents, they clearly focus their anger on Democrats. In general, there was a friendly tone to the conversations I had. We agreed where we could (yup, Democrats suck) and disagreed as well (no, immigrants are not ruining the country). Mostly, folks complained about taxes and there was a lot of talk about the Constitution (most admitted they hadn’t read it) and how Obama is a Socialist (again, he isn’t). The middle-aged small business owner I spoke with said he was not against welfare but against “people who abuse the welfare system.” I asked him why he thought electing these same crooked politicians from both sides would change anything and he sheepishly said “What else is there? I have to have faith”. During a conversation with an elderly couple who were explaining to me that “Obama was not what the founding fathers had in mind”, the crowd started bellowing the pledge of allegiance in unison which made it difficult to focus.
Basically, my final analysis of the event is that the Tea Party is MoveOn.org for the Right. Although I somewhat agree with Chomsky’s assessment that the Tea Party is a failure of the left to reach out and organize with them, at this point, I think the chance to redirect that anger has long since passed. Here were a bunch of angry people, angry at the government (at least the Democratic arm) and the Left was nowhere to be found. Unfortunately, Fox News, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin were more than happy to welcome them with open arms. So here we are.
By Alice Volcano
I visited the Tea Party protest at the state capitol this past Thursday—mainly to see what folks would show up, what signs they would be holding, what the speakers would be saying, what the counter-demos might look like.
The first thing I noticed were a bunch of white “middle-class” looking folk. I started running around looking at all the signs—taking photos of the most creative and/or inflammatory ones. While I was taking a photo of one particular sign (the one that displays Obama as a caricature with huge ears and money stuffed in them), the sign-holder and I realized we knew each other from back in the beginning of the millennium when we both worked in the same shopping complex. He was the groundskeeper and I worked in the coffee shop. We would exchange goods- I’d give him free coffee and he’d help me take out the trash and taught me how to sharpen my knife.
My friends (two men) and I stood up somewhere in the middle/front of the crowd listening to the speakers and just generally looking around, trying to get a sense of what the protesters are like—not wanting to rely on some liberal pundits who deem all the Tea Party protesters racists and Nazis.
Two men (and their wives, to an extent) turned around and took up conversations with my two male comrades (their stories are interwoven into this narrative). I stood there for a while, very used to feeling invisible or like an “accessory” at events such as these. Or I should say, to be more accurate, feeling like an accessory (or all together invisible) when there are older men talking about important things that I couldn’t possibly understand (ß sarcasm!).
I may have looked “blasé”—but I was listening to every word these folks were saying (I often find myself dealing with this type of sexism in this way. I’m not saying it’s helping anything, but hey—I do what I can). It was fun finding all the agreements I held with these folks. They want to have decision-making power over institutions and events that affect their communities—their lives. So do I! They don’t want “representatives” in Washington making decisions for them. Neither do I! They laugh at the US being considered a “democracy”—a better word for it is a “Republic.” I agree! Why filter money through Washington just to have it come back to your communities with hoops to jump through, not to mention missing about 20%? I don’t know! Hey, politicians are just money-hungry corporation lackeys! I think so, too!
Needless to say, our agreements ended there. The folks we were talking to (or I should say, the folks I was listening to) really (really) believe that Obama is a socialist. Even though socialism refers to the means of production being owned by the workers themselves, not just somewhat “socialized” health care or public schools and fire departments (libraries, etc…). They all love Ayn Rand—a woman who has written entire novels about her love affair with the “free” market. When we noted that most everyone was white (including ourselves), one of the protesters pointed to a man with a tan and said “He’s kind of colored!” Good grief.
I’ve talked to a slew of radicals and anti-authoritarians about the TPM and there are a bunch of different viewpoints. Some feel like we should be making common ground with these folks—this is, after all, a popular uprising that is critiquing our government. Some other arguments are that these folks are critiquing the same institutions that anarchists and other radicals are. I don’t agree that we are critiquing the same institutions such as: white-supremacy, patriarchy, capitalism, nation-states, heterosexism, etc… These folks, from what I gathered, don’t really give a fuck about other folks’ plights. If they’re OK, then that’s all that matters. One thing I love about anarchism is the understanding that my freedom and happiness is bound up with everyone else’s. “No one is free until everyone is free.” I think the slogan the TPM may employ is something more like “I want my freedom at the cost of anything, even yours.” Anarchism is an ethic—a notion that we can live differently—we can live in ways that fulfill all of our needs and desires. This would include a free and participatory society—free of all institutionalized hierarchies—a world that would allow all of us to develop and live out our desires and lives in beautiful and joyous ways. None of that is possible within nation-states, under capitalism, nor under any other form of domination and control.
When there is a populist movement budding that critiques the power of our government—that is the time for the Left to organize and help provide an understanding of how all power is connected and to offer up alternative institutions free of domination. We missed our chance to provide a framework with which to understand how to connect the dots. I’m not sure if it’s too late or not—but I do believe that the TPM is leaning so far Right due to the fact that there is no organized Left to speak of in the US as of late. As anarchists, I think we should probably try to find the folks that do have genuine critiques of how our society is (dis)organized and we should be able to offer up alternatives. There will be no revolution by anarchists alone. We need a popular movement and we are failing miserably.
I must say that as a black man I’m disappointed by the minimizing of Tea Party racism in this piece. I was glad to see that at least the point was made about the racial division that exists within the progressive / anarchist movements. Respectfully, anyone who has access to YouTube can see that the Tea Party is a racist organization. Failed presidential candidate Tom Tancredo drew cheers at the national Tea Party Convention which took place a couple of months ago when he advocated for the reinstatement of voter literacy tests, which were used to keep blacks from voting in the 60′s. Tancredo said that people who voted for Obama “Can’t spell the word vote, or say it in English”, which was an obvious reference to people of color. This type of coded racism is the foundation of Tea Party rhetoric.
The more overt displays of racism that have been seen at Tea Party rallies are signs saying “Impeach the Kenyan”, and “Monkey See, Monkey Spend”, which depicts President Obama as a chimp. A sign at a Tea Party rally in Philadelphia last year referred to the president as a “shoe shine boy”. Congressman John Lewis and another black lawmaker were called niggers and spat on by Tea Party members in Washington D.C. as they walked though a crowd on their way to voting on Obama’s health care bill. A Mexican legislator was called a “wetback”. Then there are the “Homie Don’t Play Dat” and “Whatcha Talkin”Bout Willis?” signs… I could go on about more examples but you get the point. Just because those signs weren’t displayed at this particular rally doesn’t change the fact that racism is prevalent within the Tea Party movement.
I don’t want to make this personal, but I feel like I must bring up the rather heated exchange that I had recently with some HIMC members about the failure of white progressives and anarchists to engage themselves in undoing racism work. I have worked with other all white organizations and had the same experience – I criticize them and then hear a bunch of explanations for why I’m the problem, followed by claims that these organizations are constantly discussing how they can bring people of color to the table. Still, these groups remain all white. I was accused of “copping out” by not suggesting how this situation could be remedied. I believe that whites are more than capable of addressing the lack of diversity in their organizations on their own and shouldn’t put the burden on black people to tell them how to do it.
In my opinion, the perspectives about Tea Party racism that were expressed in this article are another example of how the racial division on the Left hurts everybody.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
Interesting piece. I like seeing the self-reflexivity and attempt to note points of similarity and difference.
You know, I’m really starting to hate the “there are nutcases on both sides” argument – because it’s basically false.
Of course, any large crowd will attract some extremes – but the demonstrations against the Iraq war, for example, were the largest demonstrations ever on the planet Earth! and yet there were only small numbers of nutcases and huge numbers of people with completely reasonable claims – in particular, I didn’t see one, not one! sign advocating or hinting at violence in any demonstration.
In fact, we were decried as fools and traitors for claiming that the war might take longer than a year and cost over $50 billion – we were told we were “unserious” and “fringe”. In fact, we were only wrong inasmuch as things were much worse than even we knew.
Contrast this with the Tea Party people who are making claims that are *obviously false to the fact right now*, whose signs threaten violent actions, who have been videoed jeering at the disabled and African-Americans.
There is no comparison. You are doing us all a disservice with your misleading comparison…
Good letter, David. But there really aren’t any racial divisions in the Left – because there isn’t much “the Left” here any more. To call the Democrats “the Left” is a sad comment on the state of our political discourse.
There still are a few real Leftists but they aren’t in Democrat/Republican territory at all – but within that world, there is actual colour-blindness and tolerance left.
Great piece, you three. One thing I will say is that though perhaps the crowd you interacted with didn’t display overt racism, I have to agree that racism is inherent in the TPM. In San Francisco, the teabaggers had a call-and-response of: “Are we racists?!” – “No!” It’s pretty fucking bad when you’ve gotta include that in your rallying chants.
The problem with lamenting the failure of the (nonexistent) Left in organizing these people is that these people are un-organizable for our causes! Their gripes with the government, including their small government stance and their disdain for government spending, are hypocritical and conditional. They’re all for spending on war (I asked a man I had a verbal confrontation with at the SF rally why war was an acceptable use of our tax money, and he said because that’s “one of the roles of the government”). Their viewpoints are largely informed by Fox News, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and other fucking boners who will draw on anti-government rhetoric to mobilize these people, but it’s all empty. And these people’s heads are largely empty. They buy into it right away and then spout it back to you when you ask them what they think, but it’s clear that they DON’T understand their positions and they ARE NOT truly anti-government. No kind of organization of the left could recruit these (most) of these people or redirect their anger. (And they ARE angry!) And as Abbey noted, they don’t give a flying fuck about anyone else’s rights or position in society. Racism, sexism, homophobia, Christianity, etc. are built into their platform.
I love the Alice in Wonderland motif… haha. Keep up the great work, I love you folks.
Tom, you made some excellent points. What disturbs me the most about this piece is that it will be used by the Tea Party to discredit people of color who talk about this organization’s entrenched racism. Abbey talked about all of the common ground that she found with the folks at the rally. Of course you’re going to have common ground – you’re all white.
I was contacted on Facebook a few weeks ago by Tanya Bachand, one of the CT Tea Party leaders. She asked to meet with me in an effort to find “common ground”. Being black I know that when someone from a racist organization talks about finding “common ground” they’re really attempting to co-opt my thinking. It wasn’t hard for me to figure out her motives – she saw on my FB page that the Community Party was organizing folks in Hartford and she wanted to defuse our movement. She figured that she could manipulate me beause of my harsh public criticism of the president. She was wrong.
Unfortunately, the Tea Party successfully duped the authors of this article into buying their line of bullshit, legitimizing them in the process.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
Nice piece. It made me think that perhaps the best thing to do at a TP protest is go undercover with signs and flyers that contain messages that overlap in some way with the TP message without in-your-face opposition (i.e. not “Tea Party = KKK” but “No One Is Free Until Everyone Is Free” or “The emancipation of the workers must be the task of the working class itself” or “No Government: Repeal All Immigration Laws Now!” or “Eat the Rich!”)
Less an actual strategy than interesting performance art…that might lead to more interesting conversations that the usual left/liberal crap.
Kudos to you three for reaching out and engaging those who you might otherwise consider you “class enemies” (they’re not). I suspect that there are already people dropping out of the Tea Party movement due to its superficiality and the degree to which it has been corrupted by Glenn Beck and his ilk. Such dropouts, despite their conservative leanings, may be open to narrow issue-based alliances with anarchists et al. If we (non-statists) adhere to the movement-building model of “small pieces, loosely joined,” we may yet be able to build an alternative world within the wasted shell of our present world.
Although this is only a first step, it was a brave one at that, and hopefully there will be opportunities in the future for some issue-based alliances. Such dropouts between you anarchists and perhaps people who drop out of the Tea Party movement, dissatisfied with its superficiality.
^^^ Arg, ignore by bottom paragraph. It’s just a collection of my edits.
David Samuels wrote: “I don’t want to make this personal, but…”
First, you clearly do want to make this personal, and I think you’re right on target. I’ve been in organizations that are racially diverse and they worked out fine. Let’s also remember, though, that racial diversity is only one kind of diversity, not the only kind. There’s gender, sexuality, class, even political ideology, age, language, etc. But, in order for diverse groups to work, the people and personalities have to be right. All groups involved need to be sensitive to the concerns of the others. We are socialized into segregation and naturally have misunderstandings, cultural differences, etc. which make it easier for us to gravitate towards those most similar to ourselves. All people do this. It takes the right personalities to make it work.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
Someone will always have an answer for why their organization lacks diversity… I used my issue with HIMC to make a larger point, Kevin, which wasn’t addressed by your response.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
I’ll reiterate that I didn’t want to have this type of conversation on the blog, but I must add that chalking up the overwhelming whiteness of the peace and anarchist movements to stuff like personality conflicts is pretty lame, and is indicative of the total refusal by certain whites to do any introspection regarding the racial division in this work.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
you simply don’t know it all, David, though you’re convinced you do. I wasn’t even attempting to address your larger point, merely suggesting that you look beyond your own personal experiences before making hasty generalizations. Many whites take this issue very seriously and do the difficult work of looking hard at themselves. I wish you would practice what you preach a little more.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
Just a heads up, I believe the Hunter College thing was done by New School kids. Liked the article FWIW.
You know there is a lot of talk about FDR when refering to the president. The left, right, WWI vets, organized labor, renerts, homeless and homeowners all hated FDR. There was violence in the street, general strikes and rent strikes. FDR’s policies were a result of the peoples united hate of their president. If you think FDR would have instituted his policies in a divided nation, I feel sorry for you. My grandfather organized during FDR’s reign and he was big biz all the way. I would also like to say that through the mid 80′s I was a Morton Downey Jr. lovin, liberal hating Ne-Con (and not ashamed of it). Through the 90′s anarchy turned my away from the right. In 2005 I began organizing with the IWW, in 2007 helped organize the first chapter of the new sds (first chapter on my campus in 34 years) and in 2009 helped found the Hudson Valley IWW. I have taken part in the organizing of peace marches and work actions. Anyone who says the right cant be organized is just plain wrong. When I hear the right spout Fux news ideology, it sounds no different then Spew York Times propaganda. Bullshit is bulllshit, divided gets nothing. I love the IWW because unlike other unions and organizations WORKERS DONT FIGHT OTHER WORKERS. Get it together people before it is too late.
Just so that we’re all clear, Kevin is the one who made this exchange personal… This is exactly what I’m talking about – you’re a coward. You’re always chest out when you’re behind a keyboard but yet you had to hide behind other people when you had a personal problem with me. One of my black colleagues read this piece and told me that whites just don’t know what it’s like to be black and never will – I agree. Kevin if you have the guts, I challenge you to be a man and continue this conversation in person.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
It’s telling that Kevin has chosen to divert the focus of this conversation away from the lack of diversity in the progressive / anarchist movements and turn it into a personal mud throwing match.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
What’s with the “be a man” comment? Get back on topic. You know, when you were telling everyone on here how racist and wrong they are.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
ZZZZZ…. Typical knee jerk, defensive whining. I guess this is supposed to be the part where I flip out. Keep on patting yourselves on the back and ducking the issue – have a great Sunday…
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
David Samuels wrote: “Kevin if you have the guts, I challenge you to be a man and continue this conversation in person.”
this is exactly what I’m talking about. clearly you are not willing/able to be introspective and challenge your own biases. This is a blatantly sexist remark.
It’s true white people will never completely understand what it’s like to be black, nor will black people every completely understand what it’s like to be white. It’s the same for gender, sexuality, ethnic or national origin, language, etc. This was my point. Everyone who wants to be in diverse groups needs to think critically about their own biases and challenge any privilege that may come with them.
As for your personal challenge to me, I think you just want to yell your point at me and not listen to mine, all the while accusing me of being a racist.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
“whites just don’t know what it’s like to be black and never will”
Of course not. Just like you will never know what it’s like to be a woman and never will. Point?
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.>
From the LA Times:
“As it turns out, fewer than 1 in 5 Americans “supports” the tea party movement in any respect, and just 4% of all adult Americans have contributed to it or attended one of its events or both. (On any given day, you probably could drum up twice as many people who think the Pentagon is hiding dead aliens in Area 51.)
Of the 18% of all adults who expressed support for the tea party, the overwhelming majority were white (89%), male (59%) Republicans over age 45 (75%) and significantly more affluent and better educated than the majority of Americans. One in five has an annual income greater than $100,000, and 37% have advanced degrees. More than 9 out of 10 think President Obama is pushing the country into “socialism.”"
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-rutten17-2010apr17,0,7797810.column
Where is the war? It isn’t only the complexion of the crowd. I had an interesting conversation on my porch this morning. A young African American man and young boy came to my door selling Christianity in its Jehovah Witness form. I asked if they noticed my American flag flying reversed and if they knew the meaning of that. They did not. I asked as Christians why the Churches have not taken a vocal stance against the Wars? They could only answer that Jesus was against killing, no reply on what organized Christianity is doing. The young man could see my pain and the young boy was enjoying my cats and the sunshine, but the Wars were invisible,like the veterans.
Greetings to all of you, contributing to such a vital, timely topic.
The first thing I’d like to say is I think just about everyone here has something important and positive to say… and i’m not saying that to avoid “debate”; i can joust w/ the best of them. I honestly saw some excellent points made with regards to observing the Capitol lawn meeting and the subsequent feelings it stirred. One important point I’d like to revive, for the sake of any and all discussions, here and elsewhere, is the necessity for us to consciously strive to refrain from attacking each other. In life (and especially in rooms like these), we have way more in common with each other, as we also share a common enemy… and this enemy of control, as we know, THRIVES on the polarization of the people. So if we get caught up in bickering, it plays into the larger plan of whatever force is trying to control us. That’s not to say there won’t be disagreements, nor am I saying not to welcome and engage. It’s only natural. What I’m saying is, let’s be mindful in how we go about it. May the exchanges, whether we instantly agree on a point or need to debate/share/build upon one, be exchanges that encourage an outcome of clarity and sustained family. We don’t want to lose our alliances with each other due to egotistical impulses or knee-jerk reactions. We want to truly listen to each other. That point blends into something again in a minute…
That said, I’d like to get specific about Tea Partiers, the inherent racism within the movement and the larger issue of racism in our society. Point blank: I feel a HUGE current of intolerance and racism within the TPM (as with other fringe groups, be they called ‘militia’ or ‘patriots’ or ‘minutemen’, etc). Within that current are different levels and displays of idiocy, just as there are different types of racist people. (Youtube “Boogie Down Productions: The Racist” for a deeper essay on this.)
I think the social Venn Diagram that exists between us and some of the folks in the TPM is worth mentioning, but not worth dwelling on. There are two points that speak much stronger to me:
1) The observation a few of you made — that these people seem to hold a common, collective attitude of “My rights, even at the expense of your rights”. I think that is dead-on and worth a ton of speculation and study. That vibe is an illness and should never be ignored.
2) The lack of racial diversity in the movement. It says a lot. (We can also touch on the lack of diversity in other movements, as well.)
David pointed out something that I think deserves its own special arena of study and reflection: society’s lack of healing and understanding with regards to its racism… and specifically, how we as white folks look at the issue. I agree with Dave 100% that the burden should not be on the Black community to help Whites come to terms with how they view race and in what way white supremacy still works its evil into our lives. I think it’s on our own shoulders to decide whether we’re ever going to heal ourselves from those ills and I pray more of us do so. I do not agree that talking about racism is the same as talking about sexism or ageism or bias against special needs people, etc. .. as someone alluded to. It’s similar, but not the same. Racism in America deserves its own conversation, and America has never truly had it. A huge part of the problem is that too many whites do one of two things (or both):
1) Deny that racism still exists.
2) Lessen the severity of its effects.
Black folks cannot force whites to have logic and empathy, regardless of how hard they try… and they shouldn’t have to try. The Black community has done more than enough teaching, in its own striving for health, healing, dignity and equality, that there should be no extra burdens. This community has suffered more than enough in their nightmare called America. Legislation correcting the nightmare (LEGISLATION, not HEARTS) occurred a mere 40 years ago. In historic terms, that’s like a drop of water in a lake. On the timeline of human history, it’s like a minute ago. How many times does a Black person have to endure a White person saying, “Get over it”? How more whites don’t get slapped, I’ll never know.
It’s the White community that has to step in, know the history, acknowledge the pain, extend an honest hand of friendship & community, and be willing to build or at least co-exist in peace & harmony. The majority of Black folks have demonstrated a generous, kind spirit: even after their holocaust in America, most have chosen to remain here and rebuild their lives, extending themselves in a myriad of ways to the fabric of American life. The majority of whites, sadly, have not had the conscious awakening that they, too, play a crucial role in the evolution and enjoyment of civil rights. Too many whites still don’t get it: Dr. King’s dream was always meant for them, too. He SAID it, in the speeches! He said it, and it replays, and still goes over too many heads. That brings me to the final point, once again: the importance of LISTENING.
I hope that when we move forward with conversations here and elsewhere, we truly listen to Dave S. when he speaks… for he is a superb writer and communicator. I hope we as a community continue to see the value in waking up and having a constructive dialogue; that the dialogue does not keep us stuck in the past but that it works its natural, opposite effect: allowing us to heal and move ahead.
In Peace,
Dave B.
aka ‘DopeDave’
PS:
Shoutout to Dave Ionno, as well. I like the way you wrote about the war issue… and your last line, “..invisible, like the Veterans” is poetic and chilling. It’s a perfect short piece on an equally-relevant topic that deserves much constructive thought & dialogue.
David Samuels, I agree with you.
Peace to Dave B & A Skee.
I wasn’t planning on responding, but because it seems that there are some misconceptions about what this piece is about and as I am one of the authors, I think it now warrants one.
First off, as we stated in the opening of the article this was in no way a complete analysis of the Tea Party Movement as a whole, but rather just a reflection of what we saw in Hartford. We all agree that the Tea Party has inherently racist undertones (and overtones) and we were in no way trying to downplay that.
For me personally, I specifically did not want to bait or interrogate the few people we talked to about the racist actions of other members around the country, because I wanted to see what individuals would say in the comfort of other whites who they might have presumed to be “one of them”.
As a white male, I often find that some whites feel comfortable making racist statements because they think I won’t object. The same is also true when I’m around other men who think they can make sexist and queer-phobic remarks about women or the queer community.
Second, our article was more about addressing this idea that had been floating around blogs from anarchists and other leftists, that we (as activists, etc.) could work with the Teabaggers and find common ground. Which I thought was made pretty clear in our piece that we can’t and don’t have anything of substance in common with them.
Finally, again, this was not intended as a high-handed analysis. It was just personal reflections on what we saw. We wrote what we saw and included a few brief thoughts on what we saw. That’s it-conversations with maybe four people and a look at some signs.
I don’t know who “David Samuels” is, but you come across as a fool and a bully. What’s the point of bashing people on the left who are at least TRYING to do the correct thing? You should be engaging them in respectful dialogue. Are you looking for converts, or heretics?
Among GOPers in the late 1970s, there used to be something called the 80-20 rule. If a fellow right winger was with you 80% of the time, he was automatically your ally, regardless of his positions the other 20% of the time.
That meant you treated him as a friend, and tried to win him over gently on the 20%. (The Tea Partiers are doomed because they don’t follow this rule.)
I suggest, Mr. Samuels, that you avail yourself of an 80-20 mindset and look to how you can build consensus among fellow lefties, not try to show them how morally superior you are.
Because while you engage in your destructive behavoir, the plutocrats are laughing all the way to the (bailed out) bank. The real enemy resides in CityPlace and One State Street, not among your leftist colleagues.
Your threat to “Kevin” to “be a man” and “take this conversation outside” carries an implicit threat of physical violence. It’s morally repugnant behavior.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
You and Kevin should go bowling together. The racial stereotyping at the end is a nice touch.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
Like I said.
By the way, I haven’t disclosed my racial identity, and I’m not going to.
Hey Fred Internet Tough Guy, who said that you have to be white to be an agent of racism? Talk to Michael Steele about that… Thanks for fulfilling the prediction that I made on Facebook last night. To all of the other haters keep those comments coming, you would be surprised to know who’s watching right now. You’re all proving my case. It’s breathtaking to see all of the support out there for the overwhelmingly white anarchist / peace movements.
This message violates the terms of our commenting guidelines. Please refer to the note under the comment box and to our Principles of Unity on the About page.
so anyway, I thought the article was terrific, especially Alice’s piece.
Dave Ionno – Way back in the day when I was a good God fearing Christian, I attended church at Sacred Heart in Suffield. Following the US invasion on Afghanistan and Iraq, the priest there, Father Dennis, was very vocal about his opposition to the war. He wrote about the horrible daily events in the church bulletin and spoke about it during his sermons. Because of this he was not very popular among the community, as you can image in a wealthy suburb. He’s now at St. Mary’s in Newington and I hope he still vocal about it there.
Some observations from the post, to see if we can get back to the point:
Jabberwocky wrote: “We could resolve not to abuse the English language and do mental gymnastics in order to paint anyone we disagree with as an “enemy” instead of someone we just have a disagreement with. If we’re not careful, we might even start to sound human, compassionate, and like folks that people just might want to be in a movement with!”
How true and predictive this statement has proven to be. We have degraded the language, degraded the debate, and degraded ourselves by degrading the “other.”
Cheshire Cat wrote: “Basically, my final analysis of the event is that the Tea Party is MoveOn.org for the Right”
To this, I disagree. As an agent of agreement, I can see your point, but if you look at the use of facts and evidence, at least MoveOn.org has a leg or two to stand on. They are pretty good at sourcing their information.
For the record, I don’t think Dave’s statement about “being a man” was one w/ violent undertones, as much as it meant “let’s talk man to man”, or “face to face”. I think Dave’s point was that some people grow big nads behind a screen… and he’d prefer folks (any & all) to just “be real” when it comes to speaking to each other in person. Not everyone may have agreed with his choice of words, but I would hope everyone agrees with the sentiment: the challenge for all of us to simply be real w/ each other… to not act all chummy in person and then be intolerant of said person’s views behind a screen.
I’m a little sad. My first visit to this board saw personal attacks between people… and I don’t think it needed to go there. And some of us have asked all of us to refrain from doing that. So… I’m asking again, as a member of this community, can we please stop attacking each other? Can we practice some couth & decency here, without name-calling & a whole buncha assumptions? If we can, it’d be so much more enjoyable & productive.
I hope you all find the following article incredibly insightful, as I did. I think Tim Wise has a most fitting surname.
Imagine: Protest, Insurgency and the Workings of White Privilege
By Tim Wise
April 20, 2010
Let’s play a game, shall we? The name of the game is called “Imagine.” The way it’s played is simple: we’ll envision recent happenings in the news, but then change them up a bit. Instead of envisioning white people as the main actors in the scenes we’ll conjure—the ones who are driving the action—we’ll envision black folks or other people of color instead. The object of the game is to imagine the public reaction to the events or incidents, if the main actors were of color, rather than white. Whoever gains the most insight into the workings of race in America, at the end of the game, wins.
So let’s begin.
Imagine that hundreds of black protesters were to descend upon Washington DC and Northern Virginia, just a few miles from the Capitol and White House, armed with AK-47s, assorted handguns, and ammunition. And imagine that some of these protesters–the black protesters–spoke of the need for political revolution, and possibly even armed conflict in the event that laws they didn’t like were enforced by the government. Would these protesters–these black protesters with guns–be seen as brave defenders of the Second Amendment, or would they be viewed by most whites as a danger to the republic? What if they were Arab-Americans? Because, after all, that’s what happened recently when white gun enthusiasts descended upon the nation’s capital, arms in hand, and verbally announced their readiness to make war on the country’s political leaders if the need arose.
Imagine that white members of Congress, while walking to work, were surrounded by thousands of angry black people, one of whom proceeded to spit on one of those congressmen for not voting the way the black demonstrators desired. Would the protesters be seen as merely patriotic Americans voicing their opinions, or as an angry, potentially violent, and even insurrectionary mob? After all, this is what white Tea Party protesters did recently in Washington.
Imagine that a rap artist were to say, in reference to a white president: “He’s a piece of shit and I told him to suck on my machine gun.” Because that’s what rocker Ted Nugent said recently about President Obama.
Imagine that a prominent mainstream black political commentator had long employed an overt bigot as Executive Director of his organization, and that this bigot regularly participated in black separatist conferences, and once assaulted a white person while calling them by a racial slur. When that prominent black commentator and his sister–who also works for the organization–defended the bigot as a good guy who was misunderstood and “going through a tough time in his life” would anyone accept their excuse-making? Would that commentator still have a place on a mainstream network? Because that’s what happened in the real world, when Pat Buchanan employed as Executive Director of his group, America’s Cause, a blatant racist who did all these things, or at least their white equivalents: attending white separatist conferences and attacking a black woman while calling her the n-word.
Imagine that a black radio host were to suggest that the only way to get promoted in the administration of a white president is by “hating black people,” or that a prominent white person had only endorsed a white presidential candidate as an act of racial bonding, or blamed a white president for a fight on a school bus in which a black kid was jumped by two white kids, or said that he wouldn’t want to kill all conservatives, but rather, would like to leave just enough–“living fossils” as he called them–“so we will never forget what these people stood for.” After all, these are things that Rush Limbaugh has said, about Barack Obama’s administration, Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama, a fight on a school bus in Belleville, Illinois in which two black kids beat up a white kid, and about liberals, generally.*
Imagine that a black pastor, formerly a member of the U.S. military, were to declare, as part of his opposition to a white president’s policies, that he was ready to “suit up, get my gun, go to Washington, and do what they trained me to do.” This is, after all, what Pastor Stan Craig said recently at a Tea Party rally in Greenville, South Carolina.
Imagine a black radio talk show host gleefully predicting a revolution by people of color if the government continues to be dominated by the rich white men who have been “destroying” the country, or if said radio personality were to call Christians or Jews non-humans, or say that when it came to conservatives, the best solution would be to “hang ‘em high.” And what would happen to any congressional representative who praised that commentator for “speaking common sense” and likened his hate talk to “American values?” After all, those are among the things said by radio host and best-selling author Michael Savage, predicting white revolution in the face of multiculturalism, or said by Savage about Muslims and liberals, respectively. And it was Congressman Culbertson, from Texas, who praised Savage in that way, despite his hateful rhetoric.
Imagine a black political commentator suggesting that the only thing the guy who flew his plane into the Austin, Texas IRS building did wrong was not blowing up Fox News instead. This is, after all, what Anne Coulter said about Tim McVeigh, when she noted that his only mistake was not blowing up the New York Times.
Imagine that a popular black liberal website posted comments about the daughter of a white president, calling her “typical redneck trash,” or a “whore” whose mother entertains her by “making monkey sounds.” After all that’s comparable to what conservatives posted about Malia Obama on freerepublic.com last year, when they referred to her as “ghetto trash.”
Imagine that black protesters at a large political rally were walking around with signs calling for the lynching of their congressional enemies. Because that’s what white conservatives did last year, in reference to Democratic party leaders in Congress.
In other words, imagine that even one-third of the anger and vitriol currently being hurled at President Obama, by folks who are almost exclusively white, were being aimed, instead, at a white president, by people of color. How many whites viewing the anger, the hatred, the contempt for that white president would then wax eloquent about free speech, and the glories of democracy? And how many would be calling for further crackdowns on thuggish behavior, and investigations into the radical agendas of those same people of color?
To ask any of these questions is to answer them. Protest is only seen as fundamentally American when those who have long had the luxury of seeing themselves as prototypically American engage in it. When the dangerous and dark “other” does so, however, it isn’t viewed as normal or natural, let alone patriotic. Which is why Rush Limbaugh could say, this past week, that the Tea Parties are the first time since the Civil War that ordinary, common Americans stood up for their rights: a statement that erases the normalcy and “American-ness” of blacks in the civil rights struggle, not to mention women in the fight for suffrage and equality, working people in the fight for better working conditions, and LGBT folks as they struggle to be treated as full and equal human beings.
And this, my friends, is what white privilege is all about. The ability to threaten others, to engage in violent and incendiary rhetoric without consequence, to be viewed as patriotic and normal no matter what you do, and never to be feared and despised as people of color would be, if they tried to get away with half the shit we do, on a daily basis.
Game Over.
PS: Tim can be found on Facebook, as well as his website & a ton of publishing avenues everywhere on the net & in print. I believe he just released another book.
White Male Privilege. This is what white male privilege is all about….