Posted for educational purposes ...

[1StrongBlackMan]

It was these years of experience that made the much discussed disruption of a mostly white rally in Seattle featuring Bernie Sanders by #blacklivesmatter activists last Saturday of such interest to me. The disruption catalyzed an exaggerated version of the same racial dynamics that loomed large in nearly every struggle I have been involved in in the Northwest. And, as usual, to no good end.

Moreover, the discussion following that incident feels like it’s turned into a referendum on a whole movement, bordering even on a contest over the primacy of race or class in progressive politics; a contest that has been waged since, well, forever in terms relevant to this moment. All that incited by two Black women, just two, saying something that we should be listening to if we really do believe that Black lives matter, no matter how or to whom they said it, and maybe especially for just those reasons.

We should be listening if we are concerned about the crisis of racism in America because acting on that concern must begin with consideration of our own racism. And isn’t that the demand that angered folks the most?

If we don’t begin there, we are misunderstanding how deeply rooted and ubiquitous racism is in America. We are a profoundly racist state, founded upon native genocide and race slavery, divided by a civil war fought over the simple proposition that Black people are human beings, and today, still, a country deeply divided over issues that disproportionately affect people of color – issues like immigration, mass incarceration, drug criminalization, Islamophobia, the so-called war on terror, welfare, food stamps, educational equity, Obamacare (on which the deepest divisions are in the blackest states of the South). And the list goes on.

In such a state, do we really suppose that racism is only a problem of other people?

http://www.racefiles.com/2015/08/13/the-bernie-sanders-kerfuffle-blacklivesmatter-and-white-progressive-colorblindess/

Courtesy of one, Sister Bravenak.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

1. As a start,

why can't we have a petition to bring back Bravenak?

[freshwest]

4. The DU computer program says No. She'll come back if she wants. She's doing great elsewhere. n/t

[freshwest]

2. Excellent and Hello, Bravenak! Keep on keeping on. n/t

[Starry Messenger]

3. California too.

I know some Black activists who still have PTSD over stuff that happened with Occupy Oakland. It rarely made the news though. This was big enough that some white people who said a bunch of trash can't hope this smooths over.

[LWolf]

5. I hope Bravenak will be back soon.

This was a good read, and food for thought.

Some of my initial thoughts and reactions:

The Pacific Northwest is so overwhelmingly white that some jokingly refer to it as the Great White North. In a region where white people are so overwhelmingly the majority, racism becomes all the more difficult for the white majority to see.

Yes. I love my state for many reasons. Its whiteness is not one of them. My state was, quite frankly, founded in racism, passing exclusion laws and including exclusion in the first constitution. With that history, it's not surprising that, 150 years later, it's still very white. I'm not in Washington, but it still applies.

We should be listening if we are concerned about the crisis of racism in America because acting on that concern must begin with consideration of our own racism. And isn’t that the demand that angered folks the most?

THIS. I don't consider myself a racist. YET, I've spent an adult lifetime trying to be aware of my own biases in any area under discussion or action, and trying to make sure that I didn't allow those biases to blind me or limit me or dictate my reactions. I'm aware that I've got them, I know why, and I try to let that awareness regulate my thinking about things. So, while I don't consider myself to be a racist, I AM very aware of the racism that is so deeply embedded in the culture I was born into and raised up in, and I know that, consciously or subconsciously, I'm not pure. I'm willing to consider my own biases about race as well as anything else. Is that what the demand was? If so, wording it as "white supremacy" probably kicked that emotional response, always so ready to react before reason and logic, into gear. In reality, the world as we know it was built on a foundation of assumed white supremacy, whether we support that assumption or not.

People simply find it difficult to get past that immediate emotional response. Marketers know it, and build it in to their marketing strategies. Politicians know it, and build it into political speeches, ensuring that they never really have to get specific, and that people will be "inspired" by vague words with emotional triggers.

In this case, what WAS the goal of the two women? To get white liberals to stop, think, and listen? If so, then the method may not have been the most effective way to do so; triggering the limbic response instead of reason. It seems counter-intuitive to us, to think that the way to get us to stop, listen, and think, is to "shut us down." Yet, I can't deny that, while I thought I understood, BLM has been successful in getting me to examine those understandings and grow from there. Not the Seattle thing; I'd already started that process, and thought I was making progress. The NRN thing was successful in convincing me that I needed to do a better job of listening, and to see beyond what I thought I understood. Bravenak helped with that, too.

The trouble is, too many whites can’t seem to see that white progressive politics is identity politics, which means it is rooted in the white experience, just as much as is Black movement politics, Asian movement politics…all politics. The personal really is political, not just for women and people of color, but for everyone. And white is an identity forged of fear of the other and entitlement to race privilege.

This is something I need to spend some time with. I'm not really a fearful person, and while I'm aware of white privilege, I don't think I've ever, at least consciously, thought that I was entitled to it.

If you agree, then consider this. Maybe when white progressives see a man like Bernie Sanders, a courageous leftist undertaking the bodacious act of running for president as a self-proclaimed socialist, they identify with him not just as a progressive, but as a white man – as representative of them. Sanders, in this scenario, serves as a redeemer of white identity, lifting it above racist, reactionary, angry white conservatives who have so dominated our political culture.

By doing so, maybe Sanders is feeding not just a desire for vindication, but a sense of entitlement to recognition and respect that can’t be separated from whiteness without some winnowing. Maybe.

I know that this is not true for me, personally. The author clearly states that he's referring to white progressives as an aggregate, not individuals, so I don't need to take this statement personally. My identity, which shapes my politics, is less about race and more about gender, class, and a couple of other classifications. I'm not used to thinking about myself in terms of race, which is part of the author's point.

For many white progressives, getting right with this reality will mean having to figure out how to address race and class at the same time. I know a lot of folk find that a rough road to walk, but it might help to consider this: race is a form of class.

I get this.

Those issues have been around for generations. Black leaders have been fighting to end racial profiling, harassment, violence, and mass incarceration for decades. In fact, these demands have been made in explicit, detailed terms again and again at every level of government for as long as there has been an NAACP, the Urban League, and numerous other Black-led national policy advocates, and hundreds of local Black-led organizations active at the city and state level. Specific proposals have been presented, specific demands put on the policy making table and presented to the general public, repeatedly, and largely to no avail.

That Black leaders have been willing to rise above the humiliation of being patronized and tokenized while their issues have been ignored – that so many have stayed in the fight in the face of this – is nothing short of amazing. It is a demonstration of political maturity and determination from which all of us can take a lesson.

This I know. I learned it young. I was 11 or 12 when my mother took me to hear Angela Davis speak on this topic, and I remember being shocked. It was my first introduction to something that wasn't spoken about, until then, in my world. And what has changed since then? Not much.

Yet, as a Party, Democrats have done next to nothing to earn those votes except make the Party out to be the lesser of two evils.

What this amounts to is exploiting Black oppression. Yes, I know it’s not the intention, but the road to rally disruptions is paved with good intentions.

Interestingly, there are many, many white progressives who feel the same way: the party has not earned our votes except by being the lesser of two evils. And some of us think it's been oppressive to the left. So yes, I can really see this.

It's interesting that so many of us supporting Sanders are doing so for that very reason: we don't want a lesser evil.

I feel very strongly about this part:

We progressives may be growing as a portion of the electorate, but we are still underdogs in an uphill fight. We can’t afford to alienate our natural allies, and, have no doubt, people of color whose interests have been forged in the fires of racial injustice are natural allies of the progressive cause. We understand justice and have less to lose and more to win by laying it all on the line for progressive change.

Moreover, the discussion following that incident feels like it’s turned into a referendum on a whole movement

I won't turn Seattle into a referendum on BLM. I would ask the same of BLM and supporters: Don't turn Seattle into a referendum on Sanders supporters.

I am still saying: let's be united, not divided. If I don't get it, tell me in a way I'll understand. I'm still listening.

[hootinholler]

40. +1

With very few differences I agree with you.

the party has not earned our votes except by being the lesser of two evils

Absolutely! Finally there's a candidate that we can vote for, instead of voting against the other guy.

Also the notion that Bernie went out in the afternoon after the Seattle disruption and hired Symone and produced a more detailed plan addressing their concerns is laughable.

[Maedhros]

6. I think this part is central to the miscommunication that is happening:

Moreover, the discussion following that incident feels like it’s turned into a referendum on a whole movement, bordering even on a contest over the primacy of race or class in progressive politics; a contest that has been waged since, well, forever in terms relevant to this moment. All that incited by two Black women, just two, saying something that we should be listening to if we really do believe that Black lives matter, no matter how or to whom they said it, and maybe especially for just those reasons.

I don't see this happening at all.

The Seattle incident is, if anything, being interpreted as an outlier that is not representative of BLM in general. I don't see that progressives, in general, are contesting the "primacy of race or class in progressive politics" - for my own part, and that of the progressives I interact with on a consistent basis, we all understand too well the urgency of addressing racial justice.

I think this divide between white progressives and BLM is largely manufactured and unfortunate. While white progressives cannot understand the struggle exactly in the same way as black activists, you will not find a group more willing to work together to win it.

[Doctor_J]

25. The rancor was not

"incited by two black women saying what we should be listening to". It was incited by two black women storming the stage, assaulting a good man who has been on the forefront of the blm movement for fifty years, and calling his supporters and all liberals "white supremacists". Imagine the uproar that would have ensued if something analogous had happened at an Obama appearance eight years ago. The only people defending the assailants would have been stormfront.

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Happy to K&R

Truth to power.

[Logical]

8. Interrupting good liberals is not smart! Unless your a GOP idiot! Nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

15. IOWS ...

Sit down and shut up ... white man talking!

No thank you.

[BlueEye]

20. 1SBM, I am going to have to call bullshit on that.

My reason is thus. I consider my primary vote to be a fundamentally ideological matter. A lot of us here do. In 2008, I sat down and shut up to listen to Barrack Obama, because his message honestly filled me with hope. I agreed with him, and I wanted to hear what he had to say. I remember admonishing the thought of people who interrupted President Obama at rallies, because I found it distasteful and distracting because so many of us were there to hear his message of hope. We bought in, and protesters seemed to pervert that. And I do not regret my support for President Obama, even if I disagree with a few of his positions.

Fast forward to the 2016 election cycle... When I listen to Bernie Sanders, I get that old familiar feeling. It's hope. It's a leader who actually gives a shit about hard working Americans of all colors and their plights. I want to hear what Bernie Sanders has to say. I believe in his message, and when someone rudely disrupts him, such as in Seattle, I am angry. I think that is totally unfair to Senator Sanders, and to every single progressively minded person who wants to hear what he has to say.

And the greatest travesty here is that Bernie Sanders has fought for social justice for fifty damn years.

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/22/20_examples_of_bernie_sanders_powerful_record_on_civil_and_human_rights_partner/

So many people within the Black Lives Matter movement have acknowledged and embraced this reality, that Bernie Sanders would be the most progressive President to ever occupy the White House, and that this would only benefit the cause of racial justice in the United States.

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/08/10/real-black-lives-matter-wsnts-activists-publicly-apologize-bernie-sanders.html

[1StrongBlackMan]

24. What does any of that have to do with the OP ...

Or, alternatively, being told to shut up and let a good liberal talk about stuff that you have determined is secondary to YOUR struggle?

[Logical]

29. So if i have a cause, i should not give a shit about the big picture and should.....

Shut down bernie and hillary, even though they give a shit about the average american?
Let me guess, not a big picture type i assume?

[1StrongBlackMan]

38. You have the luxury of looking at the ...

"Big picture" (read: your picture).

[Logical]

41. so bernie does not support liberal causes and needs to be shut down? Nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

44. No ... Bernie IS supporting liberal causes ...

And BECAUSE he was shut down, he is supporting a broader liberal cause.

You should learn from him.

[Logical]

45. Bullshit! Under your logic that means shut him down weekly....

To make him more liberal? Lol, you usually make sense, justifying this is a joke.

[1StrongBlackMan]

48. You're making no sense .. .

BLM disrupted Bernie once ... he stutiered .. he was disrupted a SecoND time and he changed his game.

DU:Bernie should really catch up with their candidate. DU would really calm down ... a lot.

[Logical]

28. Yes, lets have a bunch of idiots interrupt hillary and bernie all....

The primary season! Shut them down. Sounds like a fucking great plan!

[1StrongBlackMan]

37. I don't care who BLM interrupts ...

Their message is beyond partisanship and needs to be heard by those that wish to represent us.

[Logical]

42. Sound like a great way to get liberals on they side. LOL, good luck! nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

46. Liberals should have/are already on my side ...

DU:Liberals, not so much.

And I suspect unless I subordinate me interests as a PoC, to their's (i.e.e, them getting more money) you will never be.

[Starry Messenger]

19. "You're"

Interrupting good liberals is not smart! Unless your a GOP idiot! Nt

[think]

33. WTF!?

[Logical]

34. Really? WTF back to you! You want dems shutting down hillary and bernie....

The whole primary season?

[think]

35. Myopic JMO....

[Tobin S.]

9. K&R

Hi Bravenak!.

[arithia]

10. great post

"We should be listening if we are concerned about the crisis of racism in America because acting on that concern must begin with consideration of our own racism. And isn’t that the demand that angered folks the most?"

^^^ This. A thousand times this. ^^^

[SidDithers]

11. DU rec...nt

Sid

[ancianita]

12. K & R on listening.

[Number23]

13. Hopefully this thread will be allowed to stay on topic -- racism and #BLM -- without other people

jumping in to divert it to more "important" issues, meaning the issues and problems that only affect THEM.

[malaise]

14. Excellent post

Rec

[etherealtruth]

16. K and R

[slipslidingaway]

17. Title of article - "The Bernie Sanders Kerfuffle"

if one wants to have a discussion about racism, why target one candidate in the title and why does bravenak point out this particular article?

There must be other articles to post.

[1StrongBlackMan]

18. Did you read the OP ...

Or, just click on the thread to defend and whine?

[slipslidingaway]

21. I agree with many things that the articles states, but the title, starting with a politician ...

who has fought against such discrimination for decades, gives me pause as to the sincerity.

You can dismiss it as whining or take it as constructive criticism.

[spanone]

22. K&R...

[aikoaiko]

23. I'm not going to fight over BLM - Sanders fiasco anymore.

[1StrongBlackMan]

27. Good. n/t

[underthematrix]

26. I support #BlackLivesMatter

[ismnotwasm]

30. This is awesome

A must read

[Hekate]

31. Kudos to both of you

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. Bravenack knows I support the movement

but... here is the big but.. the conversation about whether this was right or wrong has been ongoing in the African American press as well. Many African American writers do not agree at all that this was productive. I am sure you know this. Or at least I hope you do.

Others are very much in agreement. To use an analogy going back almost a hundred years, this is Booker T Washington v Dubois all over again. And if these two young women wanted to get people angry at them, they succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, but they should, BOTH, read into those discussions, as well as others that have been ongoing since oh forever, or at least the last 400 years.

By the way, I got an article from Occupy (who was very critical) and I told the person who sent that to me, that the last group that is qualified to say squat about any of this is actually OWS. I love them and overall they have a lot to say, but there are things I witnessed at Freedom Plaza that make many in that space fully unqualified to say anything, good, bad or ugly, when it comes to race relations, and I mean the full scope not just regarding African Americans.

But if this discussion is to be complete those other voices have to be included... and you know what ISBM... not just here. I suspect that this discussion is actually happening to be exact, and I am not annoyed, or angry or anything else if I am not included at the moment. It is a discussion that the principals have to have.

[1StrongBlackMan]

39. You might recall that ...

The Black press discussed both Martin and Malcolm, with some supporting and others talking about "but ..."

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. Why I went well hefore those two

To the beginning of last century. That discussion is not new.

[zappaman]

36. But..."they assaulted Bernie!"

He's a nice man and they were big meanies!

So, sorry but that negates the whole article.

[mcar]

47. Great article

Thanks for posting it. Nice to hear from bravenak again.

[Spazito]

49. Excellent OP...

"If white progressives can’t get with this idea, that gigantic, gaping hole of inequity, a hole leveraged in no small part by racism, will be next to impossible to close. In fact, believing that class trumps race limits our ability to close that gap. It is a form of blindness, of color blindness in fact, that is against the interests of white working people as much as it is against the interests of people of color."

The whole article is excellent, much to learn from it if we want to open our minds to learning, imo.