You’re saying that its up to white people to end racism.
Now you’re saying that white people need to be the ones that end racism but won’t if they feel they are being told they’re racist.
Now here’s the thing: What you say is both true and irrelevant at the same time.
I think you want to do the right thing, that’s not what I’m trying to get at here, I’m also not trying to say you shouldn’t have said this. Its great you did, because its precisely what this article is about.
Here’s where you miss the mark:
This isn’t whats happening.
Black people aren’t joining the white cause for justice and equality for all and demanding it be about them, rather (some) white people are joining the protest of cops killing black people and trying to steer the conversation to something that also includes them.
Even though, as I know you know (Because you said so), ending racism would benefit white people too.
But I think you’re right, if white people would just stop, that would be the end of it. If they don’t because they feel hurt and left out, then isn’t their goal (not to mention their motives) suspect?
White people certainly make up the bulk of the problem, don’t they? Even tacit or unconscious support of a system that systematically disenfranchises black people is a big part of the problem.
I’d say that’s a somewhat uncharitable paraphrase of what I said, but ok.
To be quite honest, who gives a fuck? If what you want is for cops to stop killing black people, I’m suggesting that a more effective way to accomplish that goal might be to focus on trying to get cops to stop killing anyone. Separating it into a black vs white issue may alienate people that might otherwise be on your side.
I fully recognize this is way, way, worse of a problem for black people. I sympathize with that and it makes me angry that our society is still this way. I recognize that this IS a racial issue, but that fact doesn’t mean that the best way to solve the problem of cops killing black people is to focus on the racial aspect above the “cops shouldn’t kill people” aspect.
I would also like cops to stop harassing black people, stop thinking they all fit the description, and stop seeing black people as a threat. But I think the first step in getting them to stop killing people is real accountability for the police, and maybe that helps to stop all that other shitty behavior as well.
Suspect as fuck. Fact is, there are a lot of shitty white people out there (lots of shitty people in general). Lots of people that can be easily manipulated by Fox news and the like as well. If your solution depends on having people stop being shitty, then it’s probably not gonna work.
A man is a man, you might as well not be mad that they shot a man wearing purple pants or high heels.
The only way they don’t is if you’re saying that the race of the dead man was not a factor.
I only see a problem with this if you insist that other people not make it about race. Or that you can’t side with anyone making it about race. Basically if race hangs you up anywhere along the argument chain.
You know what, you’re right. The behavior mentioned in this article was quite clearly counterproductive and frankly deplorable. I apologize! My response was also somewhat flip, which would explain why you so clearly question my motives.
I was attempting to respond to some of the other comments complaining about those who would seek to make the issue about police brutality and lack of accountability in general, which I believe would likely be a more effective strategy in stopping the police from killing black people.
I would suggest that one can believe that race was a factor, and is quite important, and still believe that not making your argument based on race is a more effective strategy.
Black people. Black people and non white people in general.
Actually, I was agreeing with your theory. its your solution. Continuing with this line of thought.
But if white people hear “white people suck” when you try to convince them that racism is still a problem, then why do you want to tiptoe around a racial problem so white people don’t feel they’re being put down?
Isn’t the reason they feel threatened that they really are racist, even if only unconsciously?
Isn’t that what you’re talking about here?
By that reasoning, why should one side join the delusion of the other in order to gain its strength when it won’t gain its support?
Isn’t it true that if white people can’t say “Stop killing black people” after a black man was shot, because they worry that nobody will understand that they mean all people, then said white people don’t really believe black’s to be people too?
That’s not how I read it. He’s saying that regardless of black or white, the fact that they killed anyone makes him mad. Perhaps I’m reading too much into it, but he appears to be implicitly saying that making the statement without regard to race results in a stronger argument.
I hope we’re misunderstanding each other. My point, probably poorly made, is that I don’t think you should CARE if white people steer the conversation to include them IF that makes it more likely that the problem of the cops killing black people gets solved. It sounds to me like you think the conversation should exclude white people because it affects black people disproportionally, regardless of whether that may help to drive a solution. To me, that sounds counterproductive. If your argument is instead that allowing the conversation to include white people makes it less likely that the problem gets solved, I could be persuaded of that fact, but that doesn’t appear to be what you’re saying.
I don’t think I’d put it quite that way, but I don’t think you’re far off either. I believe there is a large population of white people out there who a) believe racism is wrong and are not intentionally racist, and b) don’t understand that they are still the beneficiaries of a horribly racist system that has disenfranchised black people for hundreds of years (and continues to do so).
If you can convince them that the system is wrong in many ways, you can probably gain enough political support to improve the system. If you call them racists (even if unintentionally or unconsciously so), you make it harder to gain that support.
I don’t think there’s much you can do to get racists to stop being racist. I DO think it is possible to get people who don’t believe they are benefiting from an unfair system to understand that, if you don’t start from a premise that says they are bad people.
As the Berkeley protesters swelled to fill the Shattuck/Channing
intersection, the droning din of voices began to take shape—which is to
say shapes; there was an “All Lives Matter” chant and a “Black Lives
Matter” chant, in active confrontation with each other.
This is what I’m talking about, if this is not what you’re talking about, then please start another thread.
Although the flipside of that coin is being so committed to agreed upon goals that you get corporate overlords wishing to avoid progressive taxation tolerating/funding racist nutters in revolutionary war costumes screaming about the president’s birth certificate…
I’m sorry, I thought we were discussing the general principle, not these specific people.
I can certainly agree that the people chanting “All Lives Matter” in this case are clearly assholes, and can see how that is angering and frustrating as fuck. The way they are using it is bullshit, and I don’t want to take anything away from the point of #BlackLivesMatter, with which I fully agree.
All I was suggesting is that as a matter of tactics (not principle), it might be helpful to make common cause with those who believe that the police in this country are out of control and unaccountable towards all citizens, some of whom may be alienated by a race-based argument.
Anyway, I’ll move on, because I feel as if we’re beginning to talk past each other, and I’m not interested in offending anybody. I was just adding my two cents as to what I think would be the most effective way to achieve what I believe is our shared goal, which is to have the police stop killing black people.
In years of political activism in the Bay Area, around Oakland and Berkeley, I recall countless meetings and actions in which we were frustrated that a much larger proportion of the participants were white than was representative of the community.
Why was this? I believe there were two reasons. One was that I think white activists would often talk over activists of color, or be patronizing, or otherwise alienate many of the people of color who did participate in these events.
But the more important reason is that police are actively hostile to people of color who participate in public life. In a demonstration with several hundred people, the police will inevitably detain a few people for questioning – and they were usually people of color, picked out of a mostly white crowd. But it’s broader than that. For instance, when I lived in Oakland, I saw the Oakland Police spend enormous efforts to drive black people away from Lake Merritt Park – shutting down a popular annual jazz festival with police raids, and harassing couples peacefully enjoying packed lunches on the lawn – and within a few years, that park changed from a popular site for recreation for working class black people, to a lightly-used extension of a gentrified neighborhood in which black people were rarely seen. Lake Merritt, by the way, is about a quarter mile from Oakland City Hall, and much of the activity of Occupy Oakland happened in the area between Oakland City Hall and Lake Merritt Park.
I see the response to racist police brutality, on the part of the people of Ferguson and elsewhere, as potentially the beginning of the cure for one of the worst illnesses that has weakened progressive struggle in the US. So yes, absolutely, we should be clear that this is the moment to prioritize support for emergent black leadership.
Oh sure it has. Not to discount, at all, the value of violent protest, but I remember, for example, a uni prof whose program was about to be cut. He hung a protest sign around his neck and sat right outside the uni president’s office. Two hours later, he was invited in for a chat, and the program was reaffirmed the next day, because the uni admin wanted to avoid the noise and potential embarrassment of attention being paid to this eccentric prof. Success, with no violence at all.
