While I support the overall BLM movement, the group's so-called "representatives" have lost me. [View all]

[gobears10]

Last edited Wed Aug 5, 2015, 03:16 AM - Edit history (10)

First, I'll start off by saying that I'm not white. I don't have white privilege. I am a person of color, have experienced racism on the basis of my skin color, and know what it's like to be a minority in America. I think systemic and institutionalized racism is a huge, huge problem, and I absolutely support the overall #BlackLivesMatter movement, the great activism they have done to highlight institutional racism and police brutality, etc., and I feel that phrase is necessary to highlight how structurally, black lives are truly uniquely devalued in America and black folk are in a state of emergency. On the work they do on the issues, they are great. I support using the hashtag, am in solidarity with them, and support the movement at large.

But I'm very disappointed by the so-called "representatives" of BLM and some of "founders" and "leaders." I thought that BLM was a broad, grassroots, decentralized, bottom-up movement with no real leadership, but apparently there is some kind of hierarchy? And I'm not liking what I've been seeing from the group's leadership and representatives, especially with regards to their views on the 2016 Democratic Party primary.

I'm very disappointed by what I've seen from representatives of the #BlackLivesMatter movement. A representative of BLM was on MSNBC, in which he praised Hillary Clinton's recent statements on systemic racism, and how it's not a symptom of economic oppression, but blasted Bernie Sanders for being a class reductionist. Moreover, he felt that Bernie has been merely pandering to PoC lately when he started talking more about race in his speeches after the Netroots conference, and that Bernie's basically a phony in trying to connect with racial minorities. It seems that BLM feels that Hillary is truly the "best" candidate for them on racial justice issues.

He pointed to how Hillary Clinton has over 80% of the African-American vote behind her in the primary as evidence that people of color are rejecting Sanders' view that racism is a mere outgrowth of casino capitalism rather than a separate problem, and praised Hillary for connecting with people of color, understanding the needs of minorities, framing the issues in a way that resonated with the black community, and talked about mass incarceration and immigration reform early on, whereas Bernie only talked about class so far. Moreover, he said Bernie Sanders only appeals to well to do "white progressives," whereas Hillary Clinton is more cognizant about the problems of institutional racism in this country, and that he feels most African-Americans (and racial minorities) feel the same, and that #BlackLivesMatter activists would probably like Hillary the most.

Did that BLM representative completely miss what Bernie said in his Urban League speech? Or his speech to the SCLC? Or this interview?

Here's Bernie speaking today on anti-black racism, law enforcement reform, and criminal justice reform. He explicitly expresses his views about structural racism, and acknowledges the harsh reality that economic reforms will not end all of the institutional factors perpetuating racism. Here, he highlights the destructive nature of mass incarceration, jailing people for non-violent crimes (such as drug use), addressing mandatory minimums, police militarization, and aggressive policing against people of color in which they are harassed or shot. He explicitly and bluntly states that he doubts that if a middle-class white women were pulled over for a minor traffic violation, she would be treated the same way as Sandra Bland. Bernie understands structural white privilege independent of economics. He's talked about systemic racism independent of economics way before the Netroots event too.

At the SCLC, Sanders called for the “demilitarization” of police forces, widespread use of body cameras by law enforcement, an end to the reliance on privately run prisons and to the “over-incarceration” of nonviolent offenders. Moreover, Sanders has called for decriminalizing and possibly legalizing marijuana, easing the War on Drugs, which he says has disproportionately affected PoC.

I hope that this will dispel the unfounded critiques of Bernie Sanders that he is tone-deaf or has a blind-spot on race, and that he merely views racism as a symptom of broader economic inequality. He's not a class-reductionist. His progressivism is absolutely intersectional. He fully acknowledges that systemic, institutionalized racism is a huge problem in its own right, but further argues that racial justice must be melded with economic justice to truly uplift marginalized communities of color. Both are extremely important and relevant, and we can't have one without the other.

This should reveal to anyone who thinks Bernie's not listening that he is. And for those with any glimmer of a doubt they need to research his record. He may come from a largely white state, but his heart is with workers of every race and gender. He's been consistent in his views on Civil Rights for over 50 years.

Bernie Sanders is absolutely correct that institutional racism and economic inequality are "parallel problems." Systemic racism and economic inequality are definitely distinct issues, but they are parallel, inextricably intertwined problems that feed off of each other. We cannot address one without the other. Martin Luther King Jr. articulated this very well, saying, “Now our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality. For we know that it isn’t enough to integrate lunch counters. What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn’t earn enough money to buy a hamburger and a cup of coffee?”

Martin Luther King Jr. argued that the current economic system was rigged, and that we should move toward a "democratic socialism." In the weeks leading up to his assassination, MLK Jr. made it clear that economic issues became the central focus of his advocacy. MLK Jr. gave an excellent speech about the "other America," and was about to launch a "Poor People's Campaign," seeking to completely eradicate poverty for everyone, not only for blacks, but also for latinos, native americans, and poor appalachian whites. MLK Jr. hit the nail on the head when he said, "This country has socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the poor.” MLK Jr. advocated for a government jobs guarantee and a guaranteed minimum income (or basic income). When poverty, economic inequality, low social mobility, poorly funded schools, city zoning regulations, poor healthcare, unemployment, lack of affordable housing, and predatory lending disproportionately marginalize people of color, when the youth African-American unemployment rate is 51%, of course economics matter a lot if we're aiming to uplift PoC. When you poll PoC on what issues they care about most, the economy and jobs are almost always at top.

It is largely useless to address systemic anti-black racism without taking on economic inequality. Similarly, it is useless to address economic inequality without addressing anti-black structural racism. Making college tuition-free won't change the fact employers both consciously and unconsciously discriminate against people with "black-sounding" names, even if they are equally qualified as whites. And Sandra Bland had a college degree, yet she still was assaulted by a cop. Economic reforms won't stop racial profiling by police in stop-and-frisk, or police being 21 times more likely to kill black teens than white teens. It won't change the fact that whites and blacks use drugs at the same rates, but blacks are arrested 4-6 times as much. You have gerrymandering that creates majority-minority districts, racist Voter ID laws, the discrepancy between crack cocaine and power cocaine sentencing, the school to prison pipeline, and understaffed voting stations in black neighborhoods.

Economics alone won't fix segregated schooling and housing. We need booth economic and racial justice, and it is important for progressives to not view these issues as mutually exclusive, but intimately intertwined. A particularly grotesque example of racism and unfettered capitalism mixing is the existence of private, for-profit prisons. Or the fact that one of the reasons white people have more wealth than African-Americans is that we lived in an openly white supremacist society under slavery and Jim Crow that allowed for wealth accumulation for whites, but not for blacks, meaning their starting line was way behind whites.

There are definitely cases of institutional racism independent of economics, however. For example, upper-middle class or even wealthy blacks being followed around and monitored in stores. White people and nonblack people of color clutching their purses when black people (regardless of socioeconomic background) enter an elevator. I mean Trayvon Martin was in a gated community, yet people took him to be a thug for wearing a hoodie. We've also seen rich black people being arrested by police right outside their homes. Also, another example of racism and class feeding off one another: if you are a "successful" black person, you are considered an outlier, an exception to the rule. And you become the "sole" representative of your race in various spaces. Also, you see internalized racism in some PoC communities, where focusing on school makes you someone who is "acting white." It's pretty ugly.

But we can't reduce everything to politics of identity. Economic inequality, in my view, is the most destructive force in our society, and it's something that cuts across race, sex, gender identity, etc. If you poll PoC on what issues they prioritize, jobs, the economy, healthcare, etc., top the list. The vast majority of our problems do boil down to $$$, and I think socioeconomic class is among the strongest determinants of our qualify of life (definitely stronger than race in my view). From an intersectional perspective, having grown up in a upper-middle class family despite being a PoC, I felt myself way more privileged overall at college compared to white people whose families didn't have a lot of money. I felt I had a lot more resources and opportunities than them. Similarly, I'd wager that overall, LeBron James' daughter has a much higher quality of life than an impoverished white boy growing up in Appalachia.

Systemic racism is an important issue, and I hope BLM can find better leadership to pursue the cause. Code Pink slamming Condi is one thing, same with AIDS activists condemning Reagan, but this group taking their frustrations out on Bernie Sanders is BULLSHIT.

Bernie, who was a Civil Rights Activist in the 1960s to fight anti-black oppression. Bernie, who marched with MLK in 1963 and witnessed his "I Had a Dream" speech at the "March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom." Bernie who was a student organizer for the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). Bernie who coordinated sit-ins against racially segregated housing at the University of Chicago. Bernie who got arrested for civil disobedience, protesting racially segregated schools in Chicago.

Bernie who publicly denounced police brutality. Bernie who backed Jesse Jackson's 1988 run for POTUS, who opposed the tough on crime policies of the 1990s, who opposed the 1996 welfare reform that marginalized poor women of color. Who continues to oppose mass incarceration, the war on drugs, police militarization, police brutality, the death penalty, etc. He wants to stop incarcerating people and building more jails, he wants to build more schools. He wants to stop locking up people for non-violent crimes, and wants to look at our drug laws. He wants to put body cameras on police. He opposes mandatory minimums. He supports community policing. I assume he's against three-strikes laws, stop-and-frisk. He voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons. He supports rehabilitation over punitive measures. He wants to lower recidivism. He's against putting hundreds of thousands of cops on the street. He wants to decriminalize marijuana consumption, and is looking at legalization.

He was the first POTUS to say Sandra Bland's name, and directly addressed systemic racism, and acknowledged that beyond economic reforms, more had to be done to specifically address institutional factors behind anti-black racism. He condemned the Sandra Bland video, talked about how police harass, assault, and kill people of color. He's in the right on the issue.

The real enemies are pro-tough on crime Democrats like Dianne Feinstein and establishment Republicans, not Bernie, the most progressive member in the U.S. Congress.

I just dislike how some BLM "leaders" and "representatives" argue that when Bernie talks about tuition-free college, it's not important to their cause or issues. Like economic populism won't help poor PoC the most.

Look, there are instances of institutionalized racism independent of class. Our society is structured on systemic white privilege, cis-heteropatriarchy, unfettered capitalism, and other overlapping systems of oppression (kyriarchy).

Having said that, from an intersectional perspective, if you eliminate class-based oppression, you do blunt most of the suffering that plagues the African-American community. The catalyst for Baltimore was police brutality, but tell me that it wasn't important that the area had high levels of unemployment, poverty, poor education resources, low opportunities for upward mobility, and other class-related problems. Tell me that city zoning laws, property-tax financed public schools, single-parent homes, etc., aren't important in upward mobility. Tell me that healthcare, a lack of networking and connections, and avenues to college aren't extremely important. When the youth african american unemployment rate is 51%, tell me that that's not important. Affordable housing, minimum wages, jobs, education, etc., of course these are important, given that poverty causes more crime. With less crime, it'll be easier to call out cops for excessive use of force.

Class-based oppression intersects with racism to exacerbate racism. Much of racism is fundamentally rooted in unfettered capitalism, although there is racism independent of economics as well.

If we ended stop-and-frisk, put body cameras on police, legalized marijuana, addressed the discrepancies between crack and power cocaine in sentencing, the school to prison pipeline, the death penalty, mandatory minimum sentencing, broken window policing, mass incarceration, put in place civilian review boards, etc., then African-Americans would still face a horrible material situation and an overall low quality of life due to economic injustice. They could still suffer from predatory lending and wealth and income inequality (which affects them much more than whites). In my view, overall, economics is the driving factor behind the suffering of African-Americans, and in addition to economic injustice, we need to address police brutality, the drug war, societal attitudes about racism, white supremacist groups, and so on. Just that once you get rid of poverty, a lot of the issues that African-Americans face is more subtle than blatant.

My main problem is that some on the radical identity politics left claim that talking about college or healthcare isn't important to African-Americans or latinos when it definitely is. Jesse Jackson and MLK also focused on poverty reduction as a practical, material way to alleviate the suffering of African-Americans. I still think Bernie can and should make economic populism the central theme of his campaign. But he can tweak his message to show how it affects PoC more, and the unique economic challenges they face. While also stressing the non-economic racism faced by PoC. The BlackLivesMatter "representatives" and "leaders" in turn have to realize that Bernie isn't ignoring or sidelining them when he's talking about economic issues.

Like Bernie was saying in Iowa the other day, we can't divide ourselves by gender, sexuality, and race. That's exactly what the Republicans want: to divide and conquer, exploiting the economic frustrations of the white working and middle class to drive a wedge between races, channeling those frustrations into bigotry and resentment. In contrast, Bernie the ideology that all poor and working class people, regardless of race, should unite in a broad movement. And he says the problems in society can be traced to the billionaire class' stranglehold on government. It is a populism based on economic class, and I think it is a workable leftism that unites the working class, builds class solidarity, and does what the moneyed interests and Republicans have feared for so long: have working class whites, blacks, latinos, native americans, asians, etc. join together to topple the top 0.01%, while also addressing the real and unique problems facing various demographic groups (immigration for latinos, police brutality for blacks, etc.)

I don't know why BlackLivesMatter apparently has a so-called "favorable" view of Hillary Clinton. I'm just a bit confused. Throughout her political career, Hillary has held policy positions anathema to the black community. She supported the 1994 crime bill. She supported building more prisons, putting hundreds of thousands of more cops on the street, three-strikes policies, mandatory minimums, zero tolerance policies, and criminalizing marijuana. She supported expanding the War on Drugs throughout the 1990s and 2000s (including in her 2008 run). She opposed reforming the discrepancy in sentencing between crack and powder cocaine. She attacked Obama in 2008 for being "soft-on-crime" for opposing mandatory minimums. Hillary supported the 1996 welfare reforms that marginalized and demonized single women of color. She engaged in racist dog whistle politics in the 2008 primaries against Obama. She's been a consistent supporter of the death penalty which disproportionately marginalizes PoC. Clinton also said "All Lives Matter" instead of "Black Lives Matter" at a historical black church. She hasn't apologized or publicly expressed her regret for saying "All Lives Matter." Also, she's been getting money from the prison-industrial complex and for-profit private prisons, and hasn't returned the money. Hillary is a politician who actually said in 2008 that she represented hard-working WHITE people (specifically mentioned her support among white people vs Barack Obama in the primaries).

If you're going to blast Bernie Sanders with #BernieSoBlack, #RedefineProgressive, why hasn't Hillary been subject to the same scrutiny as Bernie? I'd honestly be okay with #BLM's leadership and representatives if they were equally harsh to all the candidates, but they definitely aren't. They are selectively choosing which candidates to scrutinize and attack. Hillary has managed to play it safe and stay above the fray.

In 2008, HRC opposed giving undocumented immigrants diver's licenses, and favored a pathway to legal status over citizenship. In 2014, she felt that the central american refugee children should be sent home, when Bernie supported allowing them to stay. So again, I'm confused why she has high support among latinos.

In contrast, here's 20 ways Bernie stood up for civil and minority rights throughout his career (not just focusing on economic issues): http://www.salon.com/2015/07/22/20_examples_of_bernie_sanders_powerful_record_on_civil_and_human_rights_partner/

It's weird to me, because Bernie Sanders is saying everything the BLM wanted him to, talking about systemic racism as a problem in its own right. His record has always been there for 50 years, and he's always been absolutely solid on the legislation he sponsored and the policy views he had, he just had some troubling framing race-related problems in his campaign speeches and address. He's definitely learned, improved, and his talking more about institutional racism very directly as a distinct problem. Yet the BlackLivesMatter "leaders" and "representatives" are still playing mental gymnastics to paint him as a "phony" while portraying Hillary Clinton as a genuine warrior for social and racial justice. They want to keep this narrative going that Bernie is an old white guy from Vermont who is tone-deaf on race, and only has positions that appeal to well-to-do white progressives, not people of color.

Here's a CNN article called, "How Hillary Clinton will go after Bernie Sanders on race." Here's the link: http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/04/politics/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-race/

Hillary's strategy is to essentially marginalize Bernie, by saying that he thinks racism is merely a symptom of economic inequality. It almost sounds like Hillary, her campaign, and BLM's "representatives" are reading off of the same script!

The article completely misrepresents Bernie's record, again perpetuating the myth that he only views racism as a symptom of economic inequality (he doesn't, he thinks they are "parallel problems," and always has). And even THEN, even after Bernie started being more outspoken about systemic racism, people on MSNBC and CNN say "Bernie has a lot to learn. The BlackLivesMatter folk are young people who see the world through a race-based lens, where Bernie has always seen it through a class-based lens. Although Bernie is talking more about race now, he often still does talk about the economy and defends his class-based approach, showing that he is still somewhat tone-deaf on race, and has a long way to go and has a lot to learn. The BLM really want him to drop the economic stuff and understand racism as its own issue."

BUT THAT IS MISSING THE POINT. The BLACKLIVESMATTER "representatives" and "leaders" are MISSING THE POINT. It's incredibly STUPID to view the world through only a class-based lens. Moreover, it is incredibly stupid to view the world through only a race-based lens. There are overlapping systems of oppression, and while institutional racism and economic oppression are distinct problems, they do overlap, reinforce each other, and feed off of each other, hitting poor people of color the most.

As I said, it's stupid to say that "I am not sure that Bernie Sanders grasps the gravity of the specific pain that is felt by the black lives matter voter." Or to feel insulted, blindsided, or marginalized when Bernie Sanders talks about economics. Or to think that economic issues aren't important to PoC (African-American voters list the jobs and economy as the most important issues to them on opinion polls). We can't address racism without addressing economic oppression, and we can't truly fix economic oppression without addressing racism. Both of these issues are very relevant to people of color, and just as we can't be class-reductionists, we can't be identity politics reductionists. The #BlackLivesMatter "representatives" have a very knee-jerk reaction whenever Bernie brings up that the youth African-American unemployment rate is 51%, but that is still extremely important to PoC and black people at large, and rather than being impulsive and saying Bernie is "tone-deaf" on race because he doesn't always talk 100% about systemic racism independent of class (and he absolutely shouldn't), maybe the BLM "representatives" should actually listen and think about what Bernie is saying, and how his agenda is relevant to their marginalized communities.

Bernie isn't just merely "defending" his class-based approach in the face of "criticism," he's not talking about class for the sake of it. Bernie's not someone who is getting "defensive;" there's a deliberate reason why Bernie isn't exclusively talking about race, and that doesn't make him tone-deaf, or someone who still "has a lot to learn" or has to "do his homework." Demanding that Bernie completely abandons his focus on economic policy to adopt an exclusive focus on race-related issues is ridiculous: he should focus on both issues as parallel problems, as he is doing now.

Bernie's talking about real economic issues that are contributing significantly to the plight of PoC in America. His policies: raising the minimum wage, providing single-payer (Medicare-for-All) healthcare, promoting affordable housing, promoting worker cooperatives, defending and expanding the social safety net, making public colleges tuition free, pay equity for women, regulating Wall Street and reinstating Glass-Steagall, overturning Citizens United, eliminating childhood poverty, and investing in infrastructure to create 13 million new jobs, and opposing bad trade deals...all of these are VERY relevant to the lives of PoC, and of course Bernie should talk about them when talking about the impact of racism. Economic oppression disproportionately affects PoC, so talking about the economy is a priority to uplift marginalized communities of color (again on opinion polls, PoC value the economy and jobs as their top issues). PoC (blacks, latinos, southeast asians, native americans, etc.) have disproportionately high rates of poverty, inequality, low upward mobility, poor healthcare, access to a good education, and opportunities for success.
Bernie should talk about these issues, in addition to talking about institutional racism as a parallel problem.

Hillary Clinton may be speaking on institutional racism, mass incarceration, and immigration now, but she certainly wasn't in the past. And even if she's solid on racial issues now, she still supports the traditional, neoliberal, establishment Democrat Third-Way centrist policies. She's the quintessential DLC Wall Street corporate Democrat. She's not advocating for a $15 national minimum wage, she's opposed to single-payer Medicare-for-All healthcare, and she opposes reinstating Glass-Steagall to break up the big banks. She's iffy on the Keystone XL pipeline and the TPP. She doesn't support tuition free public college, or raising progressive income taxes significantly on the rich to invest in infrastructure. She's against taxing capital gains as ordinary income, unlike Bernie. Her policies, therefore, are cookie cutter, and will not only be insufficient to uplift the American public at large, but will be disproportionately harmful to people of color relative to working class whites. Bernie's agenda is the best for working class, middle class, and poor Americans of all racial backgrounds, but especially for working class PoC.

Bernie listened to what the Netroots protesters had to say, incorporated their concerns into his speeches, messages, and agendas. And maybe the "BLM" representatives should now actually pay attention to what he's saying, not immediately jump to conclusions and assume negative intent, not immediately say he's tone deaf on race, actually learn about MLK Jr.'s economic advocacy for poor people of all races toward the end of his life, and learn class and race intersect with each other. And I hope they do so, and stop smearing him, misrepresenting him and his record and agenda, and be consistent in their criticism against all the Democratic Primary candidates (including tackling Hillary Clinton's race record).