"sad internalized black pathology": BLMS activist attacks Black writer, is "disgusted" [View all]

[uhnope]

Marissa Jenae Johnson is reacting to criticism of her Sanders rally interruption by going on Facebook with this:

Charles Mudede's writing is the most sad internalized black pathology I have seen in a long time. I'm disgusted by how The Stranger is using him in this critical historical moment.

Here is what is disgusting her:

The Bad Politics of the Black Lives Matter Protesters Who Interrupted Bernie Sanders

Before I criticize the August 8 disruption of the Social Security and Medicare rally in Westlake Park by Black Lives Matter activists Marissa Johnson and Mara Willaford, I want to make a few things clear. One, I support the Black Lives Matter movement, which is decentralized and more like a cloud of urgent conversations and interactions than a conventional political organization. BLM might be seen as a necessary adaptation to the ether-like age of social networks. And in this respect, it is not exceptional. Other such clouds formed in Iran in 2009 and Egypt in 2011. Only racists believe BLM is wrong to insist that black Americans are disproportionately harassed, arrested, jailed, and killed by law-enforcement officers. These claims are supported by hard data, numerous studies, and the experiences of thousands of black Americans. I also share the opinion with Seattle's BLM members that, though our city is progressive (gay mayor, socialist council member, and so on), it maintains an economic and social structure that benefits mostly whites and often blocks opportunities for blacks and reinforces black poverty.
...
That said, I disagree with the BLM action not because Bernie Sanders marched with Martin Luther King Jr. and therefore clearly paid his not-a-racist dues and should be left alone by black activists (GOP Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell also marched with MLK). My point is simply that, as imperfect as Sanders is, and as imperfect as white progressives are in this city, it still makes more political sense to form alliances with them rather than risk isolation. As much as I may agree with the content of Johnson and Willaford's disruption, its context (an event that was not for Sanders but for a very important issue that affects millions of black Americans) and its brazen disrespect clearly closed rather than opened a lot of people to the BLM cause.

True, some of the people who booed Johnson and Willaford were likely racist, but many were simply upset by what they perceived, with good reason, as arrogant behavior. The event had been happening for hours, and it had taken months to organize and promote. Speakers knew well in advance the amount of time they were allotted to express their concerns. Then, suddenly, two people break out of nowhere, take the mic, and appear by their actions to claim that their cause is far more important, more pressing than the one many had come to support. This, I'm sorry, is going to rub a lot of people the wrong way—and not because they are racist but because they are human. Rudely jumping the line rarely excites cheers and applause in any of the colors of our kind.

At present, BLM is not a political organization; it is instead a movement, a mood, a roiling cloud of posts and hashtags. As such, it can for sure have an immediate impact and grab the headlines. But the big question is this: Can it have a lasting impact? If it hopes to do so, it will have to consolidate, form a clear structure, create democratic procedures for action, and make alliances with other like-minded political organizations. This is straight talk; this is political realism. BLM will certainly evaporate if it is isolated from one of the major groups that's politically open to its concerns: the progressive left.
http://www.thestranger.com/news/feature/2015/08/12/22681317/the-bad-politics-of-the-black-lives-matter-protesters-who-interrupted-bernie-sanders