Tweet
I’ve been disappointed by white liberals and progressives’ unwillingness and incompetence combating racism for 20 years. The inaction of large green groups on Van Jones resignation is yet another example.
The NAACP, Equal Justice Society and Color of Change explicitely supported Van Jones before his resignation. On the white side, Treehugger, Grist and a few other small white organizations did. But the Sierra Club, Environmental Defense Fund, Greenpeace, and NRDC, who together must represent more than $100 million of mostly liberal and progressive foundations, big donors, and individual contributors money, were MIA. These groups either took a dive because the attacks on Van were racist, or they incompetently let the right set the terms of debate before entering. Either way America deserves better greens.
Here’s today’s Color Line Question: are there organized white liberals that can be trusted to maintain their commitment to their issue when the right attacks with racist wedges? I appreciate white fellow travelers, like Tim Wise, and small white anti-racist organizations like Jews for Racial and Economic Justice, on the racial justice path. But they seem to have no influence on larger white groups like the Sierra Club, NOW, Comon Cause, Moveon, and other staples of the white left. To be clear, I’m not discussing whether white groups will take on issues of people of color, as I’m setting the bar much lower–can organized white liberals keep their eye on THEIR prize when the right’s racism comes a calling?
It’s been easy for progressives to attack President Obama for not defending Van–but do they really expect Obama to be out in front of the white left? It seem hypocritical to attack the White House for being spineless without attacking NRDC, Sierra Club, EDF and Greeenpeace for being spineless as well.
Lets remember–the most radical thing said by any national figure about racism in the recent past was Obama saying the white cop acted stupidly. The left certainly didn’t counter the right’s racist framing of Obama’s articulation of a racist incident.
In addition to this situation, in my political lifetime people of color have been let down by white national liberal organizations on mid-1990s welfare deform by white feminist groups, on prop 8 by white gay groups who blamed black voters for it’s passage, by white communications organizations on any number of issues including California propositions 187 (anti-affirmative action) and 209 (anti–immigrant), and many other times. Although some examples are from a decade ago, I see no indication that white liberals are any better on racism now.
Although whites will be a minority by around 2050, America has to survive that long. If white progressives either can’t or won’t oppose racism, then we’ll need a new set of white progressive funders and leaders to do something better. And if white liberals continue to be unable or unwilling to challenge the right’s racist attacks then we are truly on the path to fascism.
If white liberals ultimately fail to oppose racism we have a bigger disaster on our hands than climate change, because America’s commitment to white supremacy, if left unchallenged, will prevent us from dealing with the other important issues of the day, like climate change. As long as white liberals think these are parallel, rather than continuous tracks, they will continue to fail miserably.
And the world and its humans of all races can’t take too many more failures. Or, more accurately, the world and all its races can’t take many more white failures.
61 Comments
Great post, Ludovic, and thanks for putting it up.
The enviro groups avoid controversy at all costs. They are circular moneyraising machines — if you give them $25, they’ll spend $25 creating direct mail and other pieces to get more money out of you. They make the most when the environmental crisis is biggest, and they are not in any way incentified to get results.
So when something like this happens they head for the hills, thus insuring that they piss nobody off, so their lists remain as big as possible for the next environmental disaster that they fundraise off of.
Nothing ever gets any better? Well, maybe that’s because people like Van Jones serve as lessons to everyone — if you make waves, you’re on your own.
Wavelessness is not exactly a recipe for bold and dramatic change. And if the groups whose business it is to care about environmental issues won’t step up and loudly defend someone whose work they all acknowledge has been remarkable and important, who will?
There is only one way to win real healthcare reform; make companies instruct their lobbyists to stand down from pressuring politicians on their vote. In the 1960’s, activists pressured politicians because they controlled legislation. Today, it’s lobbyists that control Washington, and the legislation it produces.
Obama will sign any bill that reaches his desk. He is relying on the pressure from lobbyists, and their money, to produce the final bill that will please corporate interests.
Jane,
Companies are not concerned with voters/consumers because we aim our efforts at each other; not at the power behind the curtain. Redirect our peaceful energy at companies, or more precisely, their income, and they will begin to listen to voters/consumers.
The proposition to companies by activists is simple: Stop blocking real healthcare reform or we will take away your incurious, mindless, controllable consumers, that respond to marketing like Pavlovian lab experiments, and replace them with calculating consumers with an agenda.
This is what we must do:
1. Elected Democrats DC need to sign a political suicide pact; Everyone votes on Medicare 4 All (HR 676). Yes, big business will fund and run in 2010 candidates against Demos on the bubble in their districts and states. But, big business cannot defeat every current Democrat in office next year.
2. Democrats that survive the 2010 purge by big business must pledge to devote 25% of their time and campaign funds to help defeated Democrats recapture their seat in 2012. This also goes for defeated senators in 2010 who wants to come back to congress in 2012 in the lower house. One’s pride should not be larger than insuring 47 million Americans.
3. A march on Washington. I’m not completely sold on marching in the 21st century, but if the people want it, then, I’m in.
4. A national strike. This one is difficult to pull off in America; but possible. Unless municipal employee unions take the lead, then forget it. But, if they sign on, next we will need above average support from unionized workers from the private sector. Next, we strike big business. How, do you say? Take a look at Standard and Poor’s and how they rank companies. They currently divide businesses into about 82 sectors. We strike the number company in each sector. It’s not realistic to think people will not spend any money on a given day, rather, provide guidance as to where and how to spend, to exhibit people power.
Going to lunch? McDonald is the number 1 fast-food store; eat at Wendy’s. Need gas? Exxon is number 1, use BP/Shell. The idea is show an awakening citizen. Are you getting scared? Good.
5. Use local stores versus national chains. Spend dollars on this day with local merchants. Many national chains are publicly traded. If they take even a one day hit on cash flow, it will be immediately seen and possibly felt on Wall Street. Inventory management systems are this good in today’s retail world.
6. Ask for something specific; Medicare 4 All. Nothing more, nothing less.
7. No credit card transactions that day. Cash only, and debit cards only in a pinch. Merchants will love us. Banks will hate us.
This is hard work. No one said it would be easy.
“These groups either took a dive because the attacks on Van were racist, or they incompetently let the right set the terms of debate before entering. Either way America deserves better greens.”
As has been documented on here so many times, the above groups and others are the rubber stampers and apologists of all of the Obama administrations bad polices. Jane calls the mainstream liberals the “veal pen” with respect to their role in this administration;kept restrained in the dark.I think the firing of Van is one more example of an administration that is just a lot less “progressive” than we all thought, its not the biggest issue, but for many, as you point out, it proves that the bad policy decisions are not just part of a larger strategy that we dont see,or a feint, they are reflective of the WH’s goals and ideals – and they arent ours.
I agree. These are groups working with Obama. They are not going to get out ahead of him on much of anything. The real bottomline here is that Obama had the chance to stand up for Jones and he didn’t. Obama is the President and the buck stops with him. Instead he let it stop with Jones. That is not leadership.
This is a common failing of all Democrats (and of groups like the Sierra Club) — their initial reaction to scandal, real or manufactured, is to ignore it in the hopes that it goes away. Then, when the scandal doesn’t go away (or when it jumps from FOX to semi-respectable media like CBS, as it did here), they cut their losses and move on rather than dig in.
Granted, it doesn’t help that the press is objectively pro-Republican in that it has round heels for pretty much every silly RNC-generated hissy kabuki or FauxGate to come down the pike. But the Demos and lefties in general need to stop rolling over all the time.
This is all one fight..not many little ones. Climate, green economics, racism, sexism, ageism…it’s all rooted in the same rotting structure of greed and power. I think once you fully integrate that there is only once race (human) and that what is being done is not an attack “over there”, but an attack on US ALL, then we can cut through the bs and move together with the strength we have. So…let’s get this together, people. Race is a myth perpetuated to keep alive the idea of white superiority….let’s not live in the myth ourselves.
Yes!
“A Landmark Study of the Human Journey
Where do you really come from? And how did you get to where you live today? DNA studies suggest that all humans today descend from a group of African ancestors who—about 60,000 years ago—began a remarkable journey. “
https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/index.html
“On a single day on a single street, with the DNA of just a couple of hundred random people, National Geographic Channel sets out to trace the ancestral footsteps of all humanity. Narrated by Kevin Bacon, The Human Family Tree travels to one of the most diverse corners of the world — Queens, N.Y. — to demonstrate how we all share common ancestors who embarked on very different journeys. Regardless of race, nationality or religion, all of us can trace our ancient origin back to the cradle of humanity, East Africa. What did our collective journey look like, and where did it take your specific ancestors? At what point in our past did we first cross paths with the supposed strangers living in our neighborhood? Now, in The Human Family Tree, the people of this quintessential American melting pot find out that their connections go much deeper than a common ZIP code. “
Read more: http://channel.nationalgeograp…..z0QPim4qNU
I couldn’t figure out why no one has called for massive marches, now I know. Guess we’re gonna hafta go DYI since the major players are either stuck in the veal pen or laying low for an enviro-disaster.
I’m pretty sure the big orgs have planned one in October. They are really expensive and take a ton of organizing so they are the only ones that can reasonably handle it.
Thanks Jane. I know they aren’t the best way to affect change but I think it would be a psychological boost for progressives to see. Then again, who am I kidding? If we put a million folks on The Mall it might make for some big YouTube hits but would probably go uncovered by the press. Too bad we’re not 200 Texans crying for secession. Then we’d at least get a couple news cycles worth of coverage.
All great ideas above TPAZ. In my gut I know an economic demonstration is more effective than a march but I still have the images of the early to mid 60’s from the evening news burned into my gray RAM that won’t go away. I believe it’s those images that drive me today to fight against injustice whatever form it takes.
(Too late to correct but I meant DIY above. A real Mr. Fixit I’m not. ;-)
maggiesboy, the other side is in an economic war with us. We still believe this is a political contest. Bribing congress to increase corporate profits is economic injustice; Increasing unemployment to lower wages to increase profits is an economic action; blocking congress from passing real healthcare reform is economic warfare on the poor and working class. Lowering taxes on the rich and saddling debt on the backs of future generations is offensive sabotage during war.
Its called class war
Class warfare is intramural. This assault comes from international investors. In today’s economic war, all levels of wealth in America will decline.
Rich Little, a rent-a-comic of the creamed-corn circuit, joked to his wealthy Republican audience during one of the Bush inauguration balls that “The war on poverty is over — and we won!” And he was essentially right. Roughly 35% of national wealth is controlled by the top 1% of the population, and the bottom 50% has about 2.5% of the wealth. The US Gini coefficient reading is presently about .47, suggesting greater wealth disparity than in any other developed economy (even Russia) and on par with China.
But that’s just numbers. Go over to your nearest federal court and spend a couple hours watching the trustee and petitioners got through their “341 meeting of creditors” the key meeting of the state and the individual in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. You will see that an average meeting takes only about a minute and probably 40-50% of bankruptcy-seekers are there because they were wiped out by a health-induced financial crisis. Soylent Green really is people.
The linguistic genius of the owners of America has been their ability to frame the conflict as a “war” rather than the natural tension created by the need for property protection and reasonable distribution of wealth among members of a society. Democracy is predicated on economic fairness; without it there is no democracy (John Jay’s comments to the contrary).
And it wasn’t as if Obama actually called the cop a racist. He merely said what should have been self-evident: that taking a man who walks with a cane, and who had already established that he was indeed the owner of the domicile in question, and handcuffing him — much less marching him off to jail — was stupid.
But for saying that inconvenient truth, Obama took a shitload of grief, much of it from people who always hated him and who still hadn’t got over the primaries.
“The left certainly didn’t counter the right’s racist framing of Obama’s articulation of a racist incident.”
What “left” are you talking about? It wasnt the “left” who framed incident
and as for “I appreciate white fellow travelers, like Tim Wise, and small white anti-racist organizations like Jews for Racial and Economic Justice, on the racial justice path. But they seem to have no influence on larger white groups like the Sierra Club, NOW, Comon Cause, Moveon, and other staples of the white left.” You arent joking. Listen, Im white and Im a commie, I’ll bring it up at the lefty committee meeting of the secret, “all white peoples world domination convention.”
Solerso, Ludovic wasn’t talking about who framed it, he was talking who stepped up — or in this case, didn’t step up — to counter it. Though, considering how the media immediately took the side of the cop — and of the Republicans who were using the cop to get white male voters on their side — the deck was stacked against Obama regardless.
I dont think of the Media as “the left”. The media, almost exclusively, is an organ of imperialism, of monopoly capitalism. “Race” is one of the fake, phoney, fraudulent inventions of imperialism. Please dont get me wrong. I am as aware as my rascist imperialist formed consciouness will allow me to be of the reality of racism in America. And I am also aware of the medias rascist reactionary portrayl of African Americans. It is a massive, ongoing problem. But the problem of racism is a class issue.There is no “white” left movement. If there is, then its not left, and its probably not a Movement.Expecting the borgeouis to deliver justice is like expecting insurance companies to self regulate. Class unity is the key to a true “left” majority. Without it there will be no majority. without a majority there will be no justice, no green justice, no social justice, no “racial” justice — No “change”
Oh, the media is most certainly not part of “the left”. That hasn’t been true since Nixon. (There was a slight blip represented by Watergate, but that wound up getting traction only when the economy turned to shit on Nixon’s watch. Ever since then, the media has come under the increasingly consolidated control of the corporate conservatives.)
Ok, now both Carl Pope and Moveon have released statements. I guess they are on Caucasian people time–late, but better late than never. Now we need Car Pope and Justin Rubin to gather their white org peers to promise to never again remain silent while a political lynching is happening to a progressive person of color.
Jane, nice comments. do have to say though that in addition to them being circular $ machines, many white green groups have a recent and not-so-recent history of racist policies. so while they are non-race lens critiques of them, they don’t trump, displace or distract from their racist actions and inactions.
Superb post – thank you.
I asked in Carl Pope’s comments whether, since he confesses they got it wrong, they will now demand that Van Jones be reinstated.
It’s so easy to belatedly (in both senses) regret.
I’m hitting a wall. I’ve pushed back against my neo-con twin brother with everything I have, but he seems to be a racist/classist despite my best attempts. I can WhatWouldJesusDo him endlessly, but he still wriggles out into the republican fundamentalist ooze. If I can’t even get my own twin brother (multi-degreed, ostensibly nice and well-raised) to see the light, what hope do I have for influencing anyone else?
Sierra Club, especially Carl Pope, NRDC, etc. are NOT progressives. They are mainstream enviros to the hilt.
I was reading Jane’s earlier Post about the Veal Pen. It’s all about appearances of being someone important, and having access to those in power. The big enviro groups are just like the Health Care morning phone call for talking points groups. Afraid of their own shadow. Will do anything to be on that call and a considered a “Player”. The big enviros have have been co-opted. Pope is not a leader, but a follower. David Brower is rolling in his grave.
Lumping together Greenpeace with other prominent enviro groups such as the Sierra Club and EDF to reach conclusions such as
“These groups either took a dive because the attacks on Van were racist, or they incompetently let the right set the terms of debate before entering.”
is no more valid – though far less pernicious – as would be an assertion that “all people of color (or all caucasians) are all alike”.
The false conclusion would also be likely to surprise the author of the treehugger piece this post’s writer quotes in support of his argument. A fraction of a moment’s click on the treehugger piece that supposedly contrasts with Greenpeace is:
Facts: they are such inconvenient things. Especially when they confront ideology, funding, or a combination of the two.
I’m no defender of Carl Pope’s Sierra Club, EDF, or a host of other Big Green groups who long ago ceased to do anything than fundraise to support the bloated staffs their Pew / Rockefeller grantmasters long ago seduced them into hiring.
I’m certainly not a reflexive defender of Greenpeace USA – I know too many ex-GP’ers to have such an affiliation. One aspect of GP USA that concerns me is how many Greenpeacers become ex-Greenpeacers if they are seen to disagree with the org in private – much less in public.
I don’t know how robust funding is for groups and individuals who depend on identity politics may be, but I’m keenly aware that funding for enviro orgs who stand outside the Village and Rahm’s veal pen is quite scarce. Though I don’t know Mr. Kessler – the GP Senior Press Officer who wrote the treehugger piece cited in the post above – I’d bet either of my gonads that he’s quite aware that enviro orgs have trouble funding current jobs, much less hiring for new ones. I’d even wager the other gonad that Mr. Kessler’s aware that – were he to take a public position in his treehugger peace contrary to GP USA”s values – he’d be joining the ex-greenpeace employee pool.
Over the last decade and a half I’ve watched several green groups, all of whom are prominent, move beyond their original genesis as white boys’ (later white boys and girls’) clubs. Greenpeace has expanded their focus to toxic discharges and toxic emissions and the role of these toxins in deadly environmental racism. Physicians For Social Responsibility have expanded beyond their focus on nukes and onto how pesticides and persistent organic pollutants cause death, cancer, brain damage, and endocrine disruption in low-income communities and communities of color. Ruckus has moved beyond training forest activists and refocused upon serving urban communities, people of color, and indigenous peoples in northern North America. Rainforest Action Network has moved beyond their initial focus on West Coast forests to serve indigenous communities in northern North America and tropicl regions.
Perhaps none of these groups appear on the radar screen of those focused upon the very real and searing consequences of racism within the United States. Certainly none of these groups “avoid controversy at all costs”: many of their staffers have exercised their very real white privelge and acquired the non-violent arrest records which dispel any such generalization.
All that Greenpeace, RAN, Ruckus, Physicians For Social Responsibility, and other very active and (non-violently) confrontative groups working for enviro defense and social change have in common with bloated veal pen orgs such as the Sierra Club (or EDF…or WWF…or Nature Conservancy) is their color – they’re all green.
Lumping them in together is every bit as intelectually sloppy – and every bit as helpful to the corporatists the environmental justice movement confonts – as would be any attempt to equate President Obama and Willy Horton because they both happen to be black.
While the racism behind the latter is arguably more pernicious and more evil than mere ignorance or sloppiness that could lead one to equate Greenpeace with the do-nothing “Big Green” groups, the consequences of the latter error promise to even more lethal than those of the former error.
Depsite its unforgiveable, manifest evil, racism by its very nature imperils the lives and health and freedom of some human beings. Global warming and global persistent organic pollutants threaten the lives and health of all human beings.
Failure to discern the bloated grant-sucking “Big Green” groups like the Sierra Club from effective Green orgs that (admittedly imperfectly) work to confront both their own histories of white privilege and the environmental castrophe that confronts people of all colors divides and discredits the very activists working alongside communites of color to preserve the biosphere upon which we all depend.
That failure – and the outcome it promises – is a result only a corporatist could love.
Whatever divides us here, we’re most certainly not corporatists. Next time, I hope we’ll bring more knowledge, discernment, and effort to discussion of this vitally important topic.
Well said. Nice to see ya.
Solerso, thanks for the clarification, although it seemed to be more of an issue of cognitive dissonance than lack of clear writing.
in any case the obama/skip/cop episode is another is another where the organized white left didn’t step up.
Wpw! FDL is smoking today! And it gives me great hope. I am re-energized, thanks to Jane, Siun, Ludovic, Rayne, Phoenix Woman, et al.
“If white progressives either can’t or won’t oppose racism, then we’ll need a new set of white progressive funders and leaders to do something better.”
I think that’s where this is ultimately going to lead. New funders, new leaders, new organizations, new ideas. The stirring that is taking place is leading many to realize that the Democratic Party is no longer our friend or ally and the large, entrenched groups in Jane’s veal pen aren’t either.
I learned my lesson about the Sierra Club a few years back when I was a poor grad student in NYC. I took a job as a fundraiser for the Sierra Club going door to door collecting donations in NJ. After a particularly bad morning I talked at length to a woman who informed me that most of the people who lived in this particular town were employees of a major telco and nearly everyone had been laid off a few months before. They supported the cause but couldn’t afford to donate.
When I refused to knock on any more doors the supervisor was nonplussed and called the main office. He refused to accept my explanation that it was unfair to the people who were struggling to make ends meet for us to try to guilt them into making donations and insisted that we had goals we had to meet that day. Since I was the one driving the crew I sat in the car and smoked. The other people were confused that I wasn’t afraid to say “no” and they continued their fruitless door to door, meeting hostility at every turn. I realized that the Sierra Club wasn’t a progressive organization at all. It was a behemoth fundraising machine and didn’t give a damn about the people. That was my last day with them, BTW.
Good for you. I would never give a dime to the Sierra Club. I think of them as being nothing but “important” and people who would never get their hands dirty.
May I just add that I Love Radicals! It’s the only way that change happens. People like Jane Hamshire have a special place in history, or herstory, as it were.
(On a totally personal note, Jane, I would like borrow your hairdo for three days in October. Daughter’s wedding on the beach in Santa Barbara. Your “do” would be perfect for the outfit I bought yesterday. I don’t have the balls to go as light as you have. I have, however gone that short.
Isn’t it funny that light and short work for such a strong, intelligent, tenacious person as Jane? Not funny ha ha, funnyironic?
Thanks SD = good to see you! I hope you’ve been well.
And now to belatedly attend to my kitties, their (timely) dinners, and my sadly delayed lunch…er…supper.
Poof!
Poof? Whatever else Spook was, is, will be…Poof is part of that. You’re still long winded, dear. But, hope you know that you are loved and valued.
Great posts by LudovicSpeaks. I didn’t see white progressives rush to the President’s defense when he right accused the Cambridge, Mass of acting ’stupidly.’
Many of us did but he back pedaled so fast that we hardly got a chance.
He actually held his ground fairly long, but the right wing’s reaction and mobilization time was — as it usually is — much faster than ours. Plus, a non-trivial number of folk on our side dinged him for his remarks.
I thought he said just the right thing and then virtually took it back. Jello
Nope, and I saw some of them — particularly those who had backed other folks in the election cycle — attack him for injecting himself in the controversy.
Demi, Are you going to tell us anymore about your dress? Glad you found one..
Not a dress. Actually, I’ll go in to that later. Fixin’ supper here. Love you. Will share another time.
In my experience the Sierra Club is worthless. They do nothing to fight corporations who have poisoned our air, land and water. As for Van Jones, he will probably be better off, as the Obama Administration seems to have misplaced their priorities. Most of all, people respect courage and Barack has shown none. He has failed to fight for national health care and he failed to fight for Jones.
Why should we not criticize the Chicago gang that is using pay for play to deny us decent health care. There is the covering up the Bushies crimes. There is that cluster fuck of Afghanistan. There is the latest “Bubble” from Goldman Sachs, with Death Panels to get the life insurance of older folks. I have lots of more issues.
Wow, i see this is snarky cognitive dissonance central.
solerso–what is preventing class unity? often it’s white people’s racism that disables them from understanding their class interests, and instead inspires them to pursue their racial interests by supporting white supremacy. capiche?
Kirk James Murphy, M.D.–long post, but when you clicked, did you see a statement of support from greenpeace? or did you just see an article written by a writer who was also a greenpeace staffer? there’s a difference. and i know most of the EDs of the groups you listed, some of whom are actually POC, like Ruckus. Aside from Ruckus, if the NAACP is a black group by virtue of their membership, staff and constituency, then all those groups are white groups. and no worries, the laziness is all your’s.
dearie–keep trying. read some derrick bell, makani themba nixon, tim wise, drew westen. keep in mind better you trying than some POC having to.
Thanks for responding to at least one question about your post.
Thanks also for mentioning Ruckus.
To the best of my knowledge, Ruckus has three paid employees at this time. Their ED and one staffer are people of color. All three paid folk are female. Among the paid Ruckus folks, one has been in long term relationships with a same-sex partner.
PSR-LA’s ED is a person of color. As I’ve not been a board member there since 2003, I’m not aware of the ethnicity of the other paid employees there.
You stated:
Well, since you appear to have confidence in classifying “liberal and progressives’” ethnic makeups, can you kindly describe where Ruckus falls on your spectrum of ethnicity? Where does PSR-LA fall on that spectrum?
Ruckus appears to be comprised of 2/3 people of color. In your calculations, does that mean they are white, black, or – to use South Africa’s apartheid term – “mixed”?
Follow up-question: what percentage of “white” staffers means an organization is “white”? Is it one-fourth? One-eighth? One-sixteenth? One-thirty second? One sixty-fourth?
How does your scheme of classification apply to PSR-LA? Are they white, or non-white?
Bonus question: when you hold the crude categorizations that arise form identity politics up to the mirror, do you recognize Jim Crow’s ghost behind the classifications?
Agreed. Racism has divided us for too long. It’d almost be funny, though, if what killed us was not high-flown ideas or an accident, but merely racism, the oldest hatred we have…
Ludovic, if you chose to click though on the author of the treehugger post you chose to cite in contrast to the Greenpeace non-positionwith which you contrast it, I certainly owe you an apology for any suggestion of ignorance or sloppiness.
Of course, if that actually did happen, could you explain how – with such knowledge – your assertions re Greenpeace would not be disengous at best?
Or do identity politics place your research and conclusions beyond question?
Facts: they are such inconvenient things. Especially when they confront ideology, funding, or a combination of the two.
I love this post. thank you Ludovic.
It’s all about money. The “non profits” don’t want to loose their funding. You’re just not allowed to question them. Period. When you do you loose your job or loose a friend. I’ve lost both. More than once. Makes me sad and angry.
I think the left is as guilty as the right when it comes to bowing to the money. When push comes to shove, everyone wants the money! And sadly most cave to the money. I’m not even sure many of them know they’re doing it.
Until the people who have the funding and are supposed to represent us decide to do the right thing, with or without the money, we are screwed!
I think Van Jones decided the money wasn’t worth it. I certainly hope so.
Seriously, do we need to have another lecture about how white liberals aren’t doing enough for blacks, less than a year after 70% of California black voters stripped the right to marry from gays? As I recall, there was a lot of folks saying it was white liberals’ fault that black people are, by and large, antigay bigots (but it’s OK, because their churches and white liberals make them that way).
And why were white progressives supposed to step in for Jones when the man’s own boss, a black man himself, pretty much sat on his hands?
Ludovic has hit upon a core insight here. Progress in these United States is directly linked to conviction that white liberals bring to issues touching on race.
This was most clearly on display during the Reconstruction era when radical Republicans in Congress, African Americans in the South, carpetbaggers and scalawags worked together to advance a political and human rights revolution in the South.
As white northerners tired of the expense and effort needed to defend those gains against white vigilantes, the tide began to turn. That continued until the second term of U.S. Grant when key court decisions and the president himself abandoned Reconstruction because the political costs were too high.
In the South the vigilantes murdered African Americans and intimidated whites who were there political allies. When the Republican whites fled or were silenced, the business of replicating something the old southern order (slavery by another name, to borrow a phrase) was the work that occupied state legislatures and the federal courts for the next several decades.
What resulted was the effective overturning of the gains made as a result of the Civil War and it would take 90 years and the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s to win back the legal basis for those gains.
For the past 40 years the Republican Party based its electoral strategy on coded racist appeals to white southern voters. The code was necessary so as not to reveal their racist intent to Republicans who supported the Civil Rights movement.
With the Republican Party marginalized to a geographic base in the South, the election of Barack Obama has unleashed white rage still cannot find a way to be vented without discrediting those who utter it. Thus, the unhinged behavior of Obama’s opponents. Making up stuff out of whole cloth from the birthers, to the Tenthers, to the ‘Obama=Hitler’ crowd, to the people protesting the fact that the President of the United States wants to address school children about the value of hard work and a good education.
The core anti-Obama opposition is fueled by racism that has been stoked by Republicans and conservatives for decades. Failing to recognize this leaves us unable to understand the craziness on the right. It also leaves us unprepared to recognize the nature of the attempts to deligitimize Obama and his administration. It leaves us unprepared to defend against attacks on Van Jones.
We are witnessing a racist backlash against Obama’s election. It is not about policy. It is about what his election represents. Conservatives and Republicans cannot accept the fact that a black man has been elected president. It is a repudiation of their world view and nearly half a century of their political power.
Calling this opposition by its true name is the way to defeat it. That will take the kind of leadership that Ludovic calls for. Big trouble is ahead if we — liberals and progressives — don’t measure up to the task at hand.
Until I saw his photo here a few hours ago, I assumed Van Jones was white. Heck, I assumed “Van Jones” was his last name. Nothing about the lack of support from these groups suggested to me anything other than disinterest in getting involved. These groups aren’t doing much, if anything, to help Dawn Johnsen, Obama’s nominee to the DoJ’s Office of Legal Counsel. She’s an advocate of the rule of law in all those “preventive” detentions and tortures. She’s also white.
If Van Jones were the Dutch American I assumed he was, and had no more connection to those groups you mentioned, he’d still be out of a job tonight and they would have done exactly the same thing. That’s the problem. Most of these groups are useless to everybody, and some are going to be slow on the uptake.
I agree with those few responders who don’t like this post. Why beat up on the progressive movement? Aren’t we taking enough hits from Obama?
Do you understand how shellshocked and demoralized we all are at the kinds of people Obama has picked for cabinet, at his piss poor policy choices, at the violations of civil liberties, et cetera? You really want to call us racist now? It reminds me, sadly, of Joe Lieberman.
First, a correction. California’s brilliant proposition system that allows the majority to practice the tyranny of the majority voted for Prop 187 which was the anti-immigrant measure while 207 was the anti-affirmative action measure. That was incorrectly reversed in the original blog.
Second, Jane thanks for pointing out the circular fund raising of the enviro groups. Always good to see the total lack of accountability in the advocacy wing.
Third, African Americans were not singularly responsible for the Prop 8 loss. Any further repetition of that crap belongs with Saddam has weapons of mass destruction, it just ain’t true.
Van Jones may be the only person of color in this country who thought these melanin challenged groups would step forward to support him. We all know that ain’t where our backs will be covered no matter how progressive we are in the world. So the surprise here is surprising for many readers because you expected something different I guess. Ask any people of color if they are going to depend on any predominantly non-POC group and guess what the answer will be? That would NO in caps.
In a conversation about class and race, why is the question not reflected back on this community at FDL. I come here every day but I never see anyone who would racially reflect me. I have not seen Pach in a while. I knew he reflected my experiences and POV. Every time the question is put out here about what could be done better I ask for more diversity, more POC, different everything. This is what the dismantling of racism looks like, can anyone step to the side and share a place in the front? Can you reach out and lend a hand to make sure different experiences and views are heard here?
If the answer is no then time to look and see if that reflects your own privilege.
White Democrats, White Independents, and White Conservatives have turned against the radical communist idea of Van Jones. The racism is the vitriol that he has exposed against the white people who have sprayed people with color with poisons. FYI – the race card is worn out and is now the Joker in the deck. Conservative Blacks are rebelling against the liberals using the race card.
In a Dictatorship roughly 90% of the wealth is controlled by the Dictators and their friends. North Korea is a dictatorship and look how well the population fares under their communist/socialist system.
Hugo Chaves was “democratically elected” look at what great strides he has made in redistributing the weatlh in this country. Look at his record on free speech, freedom of the press, etc.
Hugo Chavez is just alright with me. There has been a lot of corporate propaganda against him. After all Venezuela’s Oil is our oil or at least Exxon’s. But Chavez does fight for his people. Obama, not so much.
(Jan /09)
” In the wake of Monday’s announced halt, analysts had predicted this was only the first of Chavez’s ambitious foreign assistance programs that would disappear, given the sharp drop in oil prices and the Venezuelan government’s dependence on oil export income.
Venezuelan government officials wasted no time in reinstating the program, which saved about 180,000 U.S. households around $260 apiece in 2008. That covered about one month’s heating bill.
Among the beneficiaries of the 100 gallons of heating oil were 65 Indian tribes, including those in Alaska, Montana and South Dakota. “
http://www.truthout.org/010809N
“Watch a world exclusive trailer from Oliver Stone’s South of the Border.
As is often the case, the man I met was not the man I’d read and heard about in the US media. I was able to return in January 2009 to interview President Chávez in more depth. Was Hugo Chávez really the anti–American force we’ve been told he is? Once we began our journey, we found ourselves going beyond Venezuela to several other countries, and interviewing seven presidents in the region, telling a larger and even more compelling story, which has now become South of the Border. Leader after leader seemed to be saying the same thing. They wanted to control their own resources, strengthen regional ties, be treated as equals with the US, and become financially independent of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). “
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film…..ugo-chavez
Maybe you guys can help me. I’m trying to decide if this is racist.
http://www.thenoseonyourface.c…..al-poster/
It’s been easy for progressives to attack President Obama for not defending Van–but do they really expect Obama to be out in front of the white left?
Hell, I’d be happy if Obama was even bringing up the rear on healthcare, but he seems to be hunkered down in a foxhole in the WH with Rahm. If progressives have to work as hard as we have been to get Obama to not throw one his signature peices of legislation out with the congressional bath-water, how do you, LudovicSpeaks, expect any better on the Van Jones issue?
From FISA to DOMA to Don’t-Ask to the bank bailout, I’m not seeing Obama out front on very much at all. We’ll add Van Jones to the list, but I don’t agree at all that this one is all on white progessives.
Unfortunately, the TradMed take on this is that Jones deserved to resign. This is the take that all your non-blog-reading rellies and friends will be seeing:
http://www.salon.com/politics/…..index.html
A bit of backgound, Ludovic:
As of the time I posted my first question, Ruckus hadn’t posted any objection to Van Jones’ pushout (by Obama) and resignation on their website. Ruckus’ twitter feed also didn’t show any objection.
Your post ascribed Greenpeace’s apparent silence on Van Jones’ pushout / firing (by Obama) to racism.
What evidence – other than the executive directors’ ethnicity – backs up your apparent choice to ascribe GP’s apparent silence re Van Jones’ pushout / resignation to racism, while remaining silent about Ruckus’s lack of official response to Van Jones’ pushout / resignation.
In other words: save for identity politics, what’s the diff between GP’s apparent official silence and Ruckus’ apparent official silence?
I’m in agreement with Cujo359 @ 44. Ludovic makes important points, but I fear that race played an amplifying, not a defining role in Van’s situation. The Obama White House isn’t putting any muscle behind getting Dawn Johnson confirmed as head of the DoJ Office of Legal Counsel, either. Nor have most mainstream legal groups come out strongly to support her, even though she’s eminently qualified. For Van, it’s incompetence, cowardice AND racism. The Extremist Right seizes on anything they think will be a big enough club. Virtually every group shrinks before them, or spend so much time figuring out how to respond that it’s simply overwhleming incompetence. But there is no question that given the long, sorry tale of liberal/progressive silence and all-too-frequent betrayal of POC’s issues, the spinelessness of mainstream enviro groups rankles even more in this situation.
I don’t know if it’s accurate to ascribe the slowness in standing up for Van Jones to racism. I think a lot of mainstream liberal groups are unwilling to stand up for anyone white or black if it goes against Obama. They also just kind of move slowly in general. There was activity coalescing, but the resignation happened before it got going. These are problems, to be sure, but I don’t know if they’re race-specific. More spine and speed specific. Also, Greenpeace was 100 percent willing to jump into action for Van earlier than other groups, but acting alone without support from moderate environmental groups wouldn’t have helped Van keep his job.