

I guess that I spend more time thinking about race and racism than most white people. Almost every time I see someone pulled over by a police officer, I hope that it’s not someone being harassed for his/her skin color. In class, I find myself thinking a lot about how I’m including the perspectives of people of color in my social commentary. I try to choose authors and blogs with an eye towards ample representation of voices of color, so that I’m not getting only ‘whitewashed’ news. And I talk about race a fair amount, with students and friends and colleagues and mentors like Lenny.
I would bet, though, that even people who don’t usually think about race much have had a hard time ignoring it over this past year. Slightly more than a year ago, an African-American man was inaugurated as our nation’s President, and people were tripping over themselves declaring that “racism is dead” or some other such clever-sounding, idealistic, and thoroughly nonsensical thing (what, “post-racist” is the new black? Or Black?”). Before the stage was even disassembled, the racist invectives, white nationalist zeal, and thinly-veiled mainstream prejudice seemed to permeate every aspect of our political institutions. It became painfully obvious that, while perhaps slightly wounded in some parts of the country and among some parts of the electorate, racism is anything but dead.
And, so, as I often do, when I am somewhat obsessed about something (my husband is probably glad I’m out of my whole Czarist Russia craze!), I started reading about race. A lot. I read about slave-owning families and the Civil War and slave labor under the Belgian colony and about Reconstruction and Marian Anderson and debt peonage in the post-Civil War South and Dixiecrats and Barry Goldwater and about racial divides in Chicago neighborhoods and the 1964 Freedom Rides and W.E.B. DuBois. I read about Obama himself, the rise of white nationalism, school segregation, anti-racist organizing, unsung heroes of the civil rights movement, and about the connection between race and immigration.
Of course none of that reading held any firm answers to the difficult questions that surround the uniquely pathological relationship that the United States has with race and racism. But I remain convinced that we all need to be a little bit obsessed with racism and its vicious and insidious nature, a little bit overwhelmed by its persistence and wickedness, a little bit maddened by its permutations and sneakiness.
And, so, in an attempt to infect others with the bug by which I was bitten after reading a white nationalist group’s email rejoicing at Obama’s election (because now it would become obvious to all of the apathetic would-be ‘racial patriots’ that Blacks have ’stepped out of bounds’ and that a full-on ‘racial holy war’ is the only answer) and realizing that they probably WOULD see an uptick in recruitment after the inauguration, here are some of the thoughts that I have been mulling over for the past several months.
If anyone wants additional texts from the informal reading list that I pulled together for myself, just email me or leave a comment. And I’m always looking for new suggested titles, too!
It’s obvious that we can’t legislate love–meaning, in this context, that we can use social policy to regulate people’s behavior but not their attitudes. In the racial justice arena, this means that, for many, when the gains of the civil rights movement meant that African Americans and other people of color had legal claims to the same rights, whites trying to protect their privilege sought other means of social distance through which to insulate it. So, as William Julius Wilson illustrates in There Goes the Neighborhood, when schools were integrated, white families moved to other neighborhoods to keep their children from going to integrated schools. Community development initiatives become little more than dressed-up gentrification, aimed at keeping undesirable (Black) households out. As an obvious believer in the power of social policy, this is particularly vexing. How can those of us not patient enough to wait for slow ’soul changing’ work win more secure gains in the status of people of color, as long as these techniques for avoidance thrive?
Pervasive throughout much of what I read is a kind of ‘leave it to the children’ approach, a belief that somehow racism is the exclusive purview of previous generations that will slowly die out as those cohorts do. It’s a sad and unfortunately untrue mischaracterization of the motivations for yesterday’s racism and the likelihood of improvement tomorrow. I don’t mean to suggest that we haven’t progressed as a nation within the past few decades. It is undeniable that we have. But I believe that most of that progress is attributable to the courageous and visionary agitation of people of color and their allies, not from some inexorable transcendance of racism. Far from it. At the park one day last fall, as the high school was letting out, my three-year-old asked why all of the Black kids were sitting at one table. Indeed.
Something else that has been thrashing around in my mind a lot is the nexus between class and race. Wilson quotes several Chicagolanders talking about how people of color in their own neighborhoods are ‘fine’ (read: of the same social class), but that their concerns lay with those they deemed deviant. There has been a lot of talk about how we need to learn from the lessons of the New Deal in dealing with today’s recession. And that makes me think about the rampant racial exclusions and accepted double standards that were part of the foundation of our modern social contract. How can race and class ever be untangled?
One of the best points in Wilson’s work, in my opinion, is his analysis of the ways in which the rapid demographic changes in some neighborhoods combined with the decline in traditional collective organizations as the primary mechanism through which people interact with each other. Taken together, they suggest a further decline in interracial contact–think, for example, about your Facebook friends. How often, in that realm, do you have meaningful encounters with those of other races (working together towards common goals, dealing with conflict)? Compare that to the workings of a multiracial labor union, a neighborhood group in a multiracial area, a Parent-Teacher Association in an integrated school. Will more advanced technologies give us better tools with which to excise race and racial difference from our lives?
Perhaps the most stunning sentence from my months of reading on race is this, from Slavery by Another Name: “the prolonged economic inferiority and social subjugation of African Americans that was to be ubiquitous in much of the next century was not a conclusion preordained by the traditions of antebellum slavery” (p. 85). Really, immediately post-Emancipation, there was a tremendous political and practical opportunity to reap significant gains for Blacks in the South. Tremendous. There is, perhaps, no more compelling or more tragic example of the importance of policy implementation than this–that we had a real chance to atone for the deep sin of slavery with a true reconstruction that would create equal opportunities and correct, through policy, for at least much of the harm that had been wrought. Instead, malicious exploitation and malignant neglect combined to destroy those intentions and trap people of color in law and practice that enshrined white nationalism as the operating principle of our social policy.
That same book also reaffirmed my belief in the need for a strong federal government. In today’s context of new federalism and continual denigration of ‘big government’, we can use reminders of the federal government’s decisive triumphs, particularly when it attempted vigorously to defeat racism and racists. It took World War II and the fear of having Jim Crow laws used against it by the fascists to get the U.S. government to move more aggressively to dismantle the many layers of codified discrimination that the mantra of ’states’ rights’ had preserved.
And, finally, all of this has made me think a lot about “unpacking”–unpacking the stories that we tell ourselves to feel better (that people of color have had since slavery to get ‘caught up’), unpacking our collective responsibility for the oppression of people of color (when it’s clear it was/is systematic, widespread, and intentional, not accidental or incidental), unpacking the ways in which racism continues to injure all of us. And in this case, it’s only in unpacking that we can get somewhere.
Review: Here Comes Everybody!
February 4, 2010 · Leave a Comment
I officially cannot imagine my life without social networking. I use Facebook as a kind of mini-journal to weave my lives as a mom and an advocate together, and also to stay connected with work colleagues past and present, former students, and the few totally personal friends that I have managed to maintain as part of my life. I share links on Twitter and follow experts in the fields of nonprofit management, various social justice causes, and social media–it’s a fantastic way to survey what’s important and to prioritize my own reading and thinking.
And, of course, I use this blog to share my thoughts about organizing and advocacy and nonprofits and technology and fundraising and the other things I love to think about. I get a huge kick out of students’ comments both here and on the Facebook feed of the blog, and it has cut down on my Post-it note usage, since I no longer have to try to remember all of the little things that pop into my head, demanding more attention. It has kept me disciplined in my reading and thinking these past 9 months, and I believe that it will be part of my practice perpetually.
But, still…I have found myself wondering lately if social media are really such a revolution after all, or rather different ways of doing the same kinds of communicating that we’ve always done. I mean, email is certainly faster and cheaper than earlier methods of person-to-person communication, but emailing my mom rather than calling or writing to her isn’t exactly revolutionary. Using email to collect contact information from millions of supporters and target them with specific messages designed to elicit action, like the Obama for America team did…well, that can obviously change the world. But it’s certainly not a foregone conclusion that the technology will have much of an impact.
I read Clay Shirky’s book Here Comes Everybody largely to explore these questions more: are these new social technologies inherently revolutionary? How can they be applied in ways that are more likely to add significant value to our work? What do we need to understand about human nature, and the nature of organizations, to figure out how social media can further our mission?
It’s a supremely readable book, full of interesting case studies, and I like the fact that it doesn’t gush or glorify any of the social media applications, but, rather, takes a rather skeptical view that ultimately concludes that they have huge promise for good, considerable potential for harm, and significant inertia towards the mundane and trivial. Which, when I look at data for how many people are taking action or making donations on Facebook compared to how many are taking quizzes about which Hogwarts instructor they are most like, makes a lot of sense–we’re still the same people, after all, in these new applications (until organizing and consciousness-raising change our lives!).
One of the promising aspects of social media, and really any postmodern technology, is in the ability to reduce transaction costs so that we can do what we would already be doing (organizing folks, raising money, mobilizing supporters) more easily–not revolutionary, at all, but a better hammer, so to speak–an improved tool for accomplishing the work that comprises the core of any social action. If we think about Facebook and Twitter and Flickr like that–tools at our disposal–rather than as gods to be served or fads to be followed, then I think we’ll find tremendous value.
The most important piece of this book for nonprofit folks, I think, is Shirky’s insistence that we recognize that our messages are already uncontrollable, that the very nature of these technologies is to resist centralization in favor of diffusion, and that what we’ll get is not the same content distributed in a different way but fundamentally different types of information–that which stems authentically from the diverse experiences of the many (hence the title) rather than uniformly from the annointed.
For pro-democracy types, this should be good news (Shirky includes examples from Belarus and Spain and the Thai military coup that are inspirational), but, more commonly, it’s a gut check for social justice advocates who also happen to work within hierarchical institutions. For all we talk about ‘power to the people’, we still get nervous sometimes when everyone’s not ‘on the same page’, and we have to recognize that loss of control over message is the price we pay for people taking authentic ownership of our cause. Unfortunately, many nonprofits and social justice causes try to use these new communication venues in the same old way–1:many–when they’re made for many:many. What you get, then, are people who feel ignored and shouted at, rather than engaged and respected.
Some of the facets of social media I distilled into some advice for nonprofits and social justice causes:
Finally, Shirky uses the phrase ‘ridiculously easy group forming’ to describe what social media makes possible. And that made me think: since groups are so easy to form now, will we see a corresponding ’shallowing out’ of these group connections (when the cost of joining is so low, joining may not mean much to me)? I think from my own experience that this is true. Even a rather hard-core activist like me finds myself sometimes joining Facebook groups just because someone asked me to, even if I don’t intend to really contribute much of anything. Would I do the same thing if the ‘cost’ of joining was higher? Probably not. So, then, what that means for organizers is that we have to find ways to deepen the connections that people form through these modalities, to create different layers of participation and leadership, and to strengthen the human relationships that transform nominal membership into transformational belonging. If we can do that, we’ll have both breadth and depth…and then we’ll be unstoppable.
→ Leave a CommentCategories: Analysis and Commentary
Tagged: community organizing, reviews, technology