[Peace-discuss] Reflections on a recent Greenwald interview about BLM

[Robert Naiman]

Which is doing more to change history: Black Lives Matter or the Green
Party?



On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 11:55 PM David Green via Peace-discuss <
peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:

> It's Anarcho-neoliberalism with an unlimited time horizon, in order to
> milk as much $ from foundations in the meantime.
>
> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020, 10:43 PM J.B. Nicholson via Peace-discuss <
> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>
>> Brussel, Morton K wrote:
>> > The BLM “movement", which arouses such fervent antagonism by David, has
>> had worthy
>> > manifestations throughout the country, and elsewhere. I have not seen
>> the evidence
>> > that they were financed/supported by Soros and/or specific groups.
>> There were all
>> > kinds of participants in the protests, aroused by the killing of George
>> Floyd.
>> > David seems to relegate the protests to a false issue; i.e., by
>> ignoring willfully
>> > the crucial class and revolutionary issues. It’s as if the mass
>> protests were bad,
>> > i.e., counterproductive. But they did reveal the pernicious actions of
>> the present
>> > system and the Trump government, viz Portland.
>>
>> I was watching Glenn Greenwald's latest interview
>> (https://youtube.com/watch?v=I_2CVBN4mlo) which is with Andray Domise
>> (described as
>> "definitely a militant supporter of [Black Lives Matter]" at 2m40s). I
>> think this
>> interview eventually gets into something relevant to this discussion: BLM
>> co-optation. I think this ends up backing up David Green's criticism of
>> BLM
>> (particularly when he wrote that "[BLM's] analysis is preposterous, with
>> no material
>> component whatsoever.").
>>
>> I think that Greenwald is too generous to Domise in trying to find a nice
>> way to say
>> that BLM needed to have announced what they stood for a while ago.
>>
>> I'm hesitant to recommend this video for running during either AWARE on
>> the Air or
>> News from Neptune because it's too long for what little value the
>> interview has. The
>> video is worth seeing for about 15 minutes worth of BLM critique starting
>> around 23
>> minutes in, and for the talk after about 1 hour in.
>>
>> Here's some more detail on my take on BLM based on what I saw in this
>> interview. I'll
>> try to hit the highlights because, frankly, this interview felt to me
>> like quite a
>> slog to go through.
>>
>>
>>
>> I still don't know what BLM stands for even after watching this talk.
>> BLM's choices
>> strike me as indistinguishable from ethics-washing neoliberalism (I'm not
>> sure what
>> the right term is here, but I think of "ethics-washing" for neoliberal
>> interests to
>> be akin to what the term "greenwashing" means for businesses that operate
>> in
>> anti-environmental ways). I'm all for cops not killing people, but there
>> has to be a
>> plan of action to make that come about. It can't just be a vision with
>> implementation
>> detail left unsaid which is what gives me the impression the practical,
>> challenging-police-policy part is left out. And what's left (painting
>> slogans on
>> signs, floors, streets, and the phrase "defund the police") seem to me to
>> be
>> distractions.
>>
>> It's not clear to me how Domise holds the views he does and is still a
>> "militant
>> supporter of BLM". I doubt even he could give the 10-point list of
>> demands he said
>> BLM might need. Domise said, "I don't even know where a [Black Lives
>> Matter]
>> manifesto would begin...they [Black Lives Matter] have on their website
>> their policy
>> goals, their ideology -- everything is already there" which doesn't
>> address how
>> little any goals are seen in the protests on the street, what the
>> adversely affected
>> need now, and that goals without clear strategy reads as lofty ideas with
>> no
>> implementation details.
>>
>> Domise claims that BLM doesn't want to put effort into making "specific
>> and cogent
>> demands" because the media won't accurately echo BLM's demands. He claims
>> this
>> repeats an experience he had with his speaking to people at Occupy Wall
>> St.:
>>
>> > Domise: When I spoke to people at Occupy, they made a pretty convincing
>> case to me
>> > that, well, yes: it would be a lot easier for people to digest at home
>> if we had a
>> > crisp and tight set of demands. But then the question is, are those
>> demands going
>> > to be good enough? Are they [the media] actually going to repeat what
>> we say on
>> > the evening news? Even the things that we have been saying that we say
>> right in
>> > front of news cameras when we're being interviewed. They're getting,
>> let's say,
>> > like two-second snippets out of everything that we've just said and
>> they're
>> > describing us as being not only leaderless but pointless as well. And I
>> kind of
>> > got that; there is going to be that obscurantist mode that media takes
>> that even
>> > when you've done the work of making these very specific and very cogent
>> demands
>> > they're still going to make it seem like disorganized movement of the
>> disaffected
>> > and apathetic anyway. So I kind of get that.
>>
>> I found this to be a very revealing quote because to me it says that
>> BLM's organizers
>> haven't yet learned that in life you can only control what you do, not
>> what other
>> people do. You're always better off explaining what you stand for as
>> clearly as you
>> can (even revising it later as you learn more or are better at explaining
>> what's in
>> your head). By the same token, this is why I find that the best evidence
>> against
>> BLM's choices are found on their own website: there they have full
>> control over their
>> own message. No other media gets in the way of passing their message on
>> to us. Yet
>> there I find nothing specific, actionable, and cogent. Real-world needs
>> such as
>> Medicare for All, rent forgiveness/control/strikes, a universal basic
>> income,
>> guaranteed housing, and a national jobs program are all class concerns
>> that speak to
>> what we urgently need (now more than ever) yet go unaddressed on BLM's
>> website.
>> Community control over police is a good idea but going about getting that
>> is
>> difficult, even after the recent police murders.
>>
>> Later Domise said:
>> > Domise: I don't think you're ever going to be able to stop the process
>> of
>> > recuperation and co-optation regardless. You know, four years ago I
>> don't know
>> > that we would have seen corporations tweeting out and saying on
>> instagram, or
>> > putting in hashtags, "Black Lives Matter". But does that matter anyway?
>> That
>> > itself is the process of capitalist recuperation: that is, willing to
>> say the
>> > thing that you want to hear because it's going to adapt, it's going to
>> organize
>> > itself in such a fashion that it's going to tamp out resistance to
>> itself. So when
>> > corporations are tweeting out "Black Lives Matter" but then continuing
>> practices
>> > as status quo they're still lobbying the federal government for money,
>> they're
>> > still lobbying to keep the minimum wage low, they're still stamping out
>> unions
>> > does that actually make any difference? And I don't know that words are
>> going to
>> > be enough. I think it's going to be specific actions to limit the power
>> of
>> > corporations, to get money out of politics, to give more power to
>> people [...]
>>
>> I found this revealing too. Here are some points that came to mind during
>> this
>> section of the interview:
>>
>> - One problem with BLM is framing this in terms of "stop[ping] the
>> process [of
>> co-optation]" instead of asking why BLM's name is so easily co-opted by
>> the
>> establishment. Domise asked "does that [co-optation] matter anyway?":
>> Yes, if those
>> are BLM goals being minimized or rendered toothless in the co-optation.
>> Domise said
>> "I don't know that words are going to be enough". Words are enough to
>> indicate what
>> side BLM is on.
>>
>> If BLM had published a series of clear, specific, and actionable
>> statements on its
>> own website detailing what needs to be done and how to reach those goals,
>> perhaps it
>> would be much more difficult to co-opt what BLM was saying. For example,
>> I
>> occasionally hear BLM activists advocate for raising the minimum wage but
>> the action
>> on that comes from other activists that don't have any visible connection
>> to BLM. I
>> see nothing on BLM's website actionably describing steps to raise the
>> minimum wage,
>> create more (presumably worker-run) unions, or organizing people to lobby
>> their
>> Congresspeople to not give big businesses more money (ala CARES Act
>> largesse).
>>
>> Domise's framing helps BLM to try to make the task of being specific and
>> actionable
>> seem insurmountable or unnecessary, even unwise. And the results from
>> when BLM began
>> and now appear to be that there will be no serious policy changes in
>> police behavior.
>> Without serious police policy change and proof of compliance with the new
>> policy, it
>> seems fair to ask what BLM's goals are and how are those goals being met?
>>
>> - "Getting money out of politics" is a phrase I've heard before in
>> progressive
>> political interviews. I've yet to hear an interviewer require the speaker
>> to define
>> what that means or point out a direct conflict with freedom of speech. It
>> seems more
>> practical to me to come up with ways to deal with that than repeat this
>> long-repeated
>> but apparently inactionable catchphrase. Carl Estabrook came up with a
>> way to
>> accomplish this in the context of political candidates not being heard
>> from on TV and
>> radio: as a condition of keeping a public broadcast license, add a
>> requirement that
>> any public-airwave broadcaster must run during prime-time a 1-hour,
>> uninterrupted,
>> and uncensored piece from each ballot-qualified candidate who submits
>> such a piece to
>> be run. This allows political candidates running for office to get one
>> hour of
>> airtime that costs a campaign real money and helps the public who
>> sees/hears it make
>> a more informed choice when they vote.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Regarding this exchange when Greenwald pressed Domise to say what BLM
>> stands for:
>>
>> > Greenwald: [...] What, to you, are those really meaty critical issues,
>> like? What
>> > are the goals of this movement whether unrealistic but nonetheless
>> worthy to
>> > strive for and advocate, or actually realistic?
>> >
>> > Domise: I mean...If I was to say, for example, that the goal is the
>> abolition of
>> > police in the carceral state, a lot of people will say 'well, what does
>> that even
>> > mean?'. Well, it means the abolition of police in the carceral state.
>> It means no
>> > more prisons. It means no more police officers. It means that we are
>> able to
>> > manage our own affairs. 'Well, how do you get rid of police in the
>> carceral
>> > state?' You cannot have a system that doesn't produce criminals unless
>> you get rid
>> > of the system altogether which means ending capitalism. That means
>> realigning our
>> > social arrangements such that we are operating under a socialist
>> system. Is having
>> > a social system going to solve the cultural state? No absolutely not.
>> There are
>> > societal problems that we're going to have to address at the micro
>> level. So then
>> > the question becomes, well, how do solve all these problems at once and
>> you have
>> > to take steps towards it. So the tough part and getting to people to
>> radically
>> > reimagine our system of social relations is people are a lot more
>> comfortable, or
>> > I shouldn't say comfortable, but they're a lot more willing to move
>> away from pain
>> > than they are toward pleasure and the pain of unfamiliarity, that is,
>> what does a
>> > system look like without police, if you read "The End of Policing" for
>> example,
>> > there are many examples and many suggestions for which a system that
>> doesn't have
>> > policing actually looks. You know, who do we bring in in the place of
>> these armed
>> > agents of the state, the people that have the monopoly on the use of
>> violence? But
>> > getting people to actually read a book or getting people to understand
>> a different
>> > form of social relations -- people talk about, like you know,
>> capitalism and
>> > socialism et cetera as if it's economics, it's not, it's how we related
>> to one
>> > another. And I don't quite know how you do that. [...]
>>
>> and later when Domise offered some "steps that we can to get there if
>> we're talking
>> about specific policy solutions":
>>
>> > Domise: Well, I don't even think that taxing billionaires more is even
>> going to be
>> > the answer. I think having a strict set of guidelines, that is: a CEO
>> and the
>> > executive board [of a] company cannot earn more than this multiplier of
>> their
>> > workers. That bringing back labor power to the workplace where workers
>> can
>> > collectively organize without being undermined by their bosses.
>> [Example of an
>> > unnamed worker-led union being fired immediately after unionizing, and
>> he says the
>> > US needs "a real left party" if we're going to pursue policy changes
>> through
>> > electoral politics which he has abandoned]
>>
>>
>> - Domise's policy points are all given in the hypothetical. This left me
>> unclear as
>> to whether this is what BLM stands for or if this is what Domise wants
>> independently
>> of BLM.
>>
>> - It took almost an hour to get to this point. That is way too long to
>> get to
>> something approaching a description of what BLM might stand for.
>>
>> - Assuming, for a moment, that this is what BLM stands for, BLM is not
>> spelling this
>> out to their audience in their protests or on their website. But this is
>> an example
>> of a message which establishment figures would not have echoed (co-opted)
>> if
>> establishment figures knew that that's what BLM stands for.
>>
>> - I see some goals (such as having no police) but no means to reach those
>> goals. This
>> particular example is troublesome (see what David Green mentioned --
>> Chaz/Chop was an
>> unmitigated disaster). Chop was arrived at undemocratically as well.
>> While having no
>> police might be realistic, it clearly needs to be thought through more
>> than it was
>> with Chop. And it's the responsibility of someone who advocates for an
>> end to police
>> to be clear about how police tasks will be handled.
>>
>> - "[A] system that doesn't produce criminals" would seem to mean
>> decriminalizing the
>> actions that we call criminal, but which actions are those? To me this
>> too needs some
>> more consideration. I suggest understanding why criminal acts occur and
>> addressing
>> those issues more specifically: if, for example, people are stealing food
>> to feed
>> their families, perhaps we should provide everyone with good food gratis.
>> Another
>> example of something to consider: Portugal decriminalized all drugs and
>> is using
>> police to help addicts get rehabilitation. This appears to have
>> significantly reduced
>> drug abuse. That seems more specific and actionable than what I heard
>> Domise say,
>> certainly something worth looking into for those who understand and
>> advocate for the
>> goals Domise described. I'm sure there are other 'threats of a good
>> example' we ought
>> to consider.
>>
>> - a more minor point: I think that Domise should get used to repeating
>> what he wants
>> people to know instead of glibly repeating the exact same words again (as
>> he did in
>> his own example of "abolition of police in the carceral state" and what
>> that means),
>> or laughing at the idea that we need policy decisions (which Domise did
>> just before
>> the last quote above), or pointing to a book (such as "The End of
>> Police") followed
>> by criticizing his audience for not reading that book. It's reasonable to
>> expect
>> people to ask you to explain what you mean when you're addressing
>> something
>> unfamiliar. I think there's a great agreement that we don't want to see
>> the police be
>> a killing squad. How to get there in a sustainable way and understanding
>> the
>> tradeoffs in denying the police that power will need some thinking
>> through and some
>> explaining.
>>
>> -J
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20200802/829330d4/attachment-0001.htm>