[Peace] An Open Letter to Activists Concerning Racism in the Anti-war Movement

[kanouse]

Forwarded to me by a colleague, thought it might spark some 
conversations/questions.  Apologies 
if this is old news to you all.  It is a fairly old letter.

--Sarah K.

An Open Letter to Activists Concerning Racism in the Anti-war Movement

By various NYC peace and justice activists

Feb 13, 2003, 19:13
Email this article
 Printer friendly page

Dear Sisters and Brothers:

We, the undersigned, are peace and justice activists in New York City.
We are organizing to defeat the United States government's offensive
of war, racism and repression against the people of the world, both
abroad and within the borders of the U.S. We come from many
communities, some of us from other nations. We are all colors,
multi-generational, workers, students, unemployed, queer and straight.
We are writing to you out of concern that destructive patterns of
behavior are hindering the growth of the broadest possible long-term
movement against war at home and abroad, and preventing the attainment
of the social justice we all seek.

We have urgent tasks before us: stopping a war against Iraq and others
around the world, as well as preventing further attacks on people
within the United States. To do this work in a principled way, in ways
that address the root causes of oppression, requires that we
acknowledge the connection between the forms and institutions of white
supremacy embedded in U.S. society and the practice of white supremacy
within our movement. As we dig in for the long haul and try to bring
together the broadest possible grouping of people, we must be conscious
of how our histories-organizational and personal-influence how we work
together.

BACKGROUND

Since the turn of the year, hundreds of activists have come together
in New York City to plan anti-war actions. Along with the work being
done for February 15, these gatherings will hopefully lead to more and
better coalition-building in the future. However, at least two other
promising coordination efforts in this city, since 9/11/2001, also
began by involving diverse forces and ended badly. One series of
meetings, attended by hundreds, led to the formation of the New York
Coalition for Peace and Justice-but only after a disastrous split
around the question of calling for the use of "international law" as an
alternative to war against Afghanistan. A second series of meetings,
held last Spring to plan antiwar commemorations of 9/11, produced Stand
Up New York-but that coalition foundered when one group insisted on
organizing a vigil "autonomously," without being responsible to the
coalition as a whole. In our view, destructive racial dynamics and
white supremacy are implicated in the disruption of both of these unity
initiatives: Predominantly white forces failed to grasp the importance
of self-determination and certain concerns in communities of color.
Indeed, this was the clear perception of most activists of color who
were involved in the events.

The problem of racism in anti-war activism is not new. For many years,
people of color and their white allies have cited its debilitating
effects, to no avail. A new era of activism presents us with the
opportunity to come to grips with the issues of race and anti-racism in
our movement, instead of continuing to ignore them. We believe that
such an accounting is crucial to the success of coalition-building
among the anti-war sectors of New York City, and we offer this letter
as a means of getting started.

WHO IS MOST AFFECTED BY WAR

At home and abroad, repression, militarism and war take their greatest
toll on people of color. Following 9/11, the U.S. government and its
agents escalated their longstanding aggression against us to the level
of an endless "war on terrorism." Abroad, that war is waged on Iraq,
Afghanistan, the Philippines, Colombia, Vieques, Puerto Rico, and other
nations in the global South. "Endless war" crowns the economic embargos
and sanctions, IMF/World Bank-generated debt, covert support for
torture and death squads, and environmental degradation long imposed on
nations whose inhabitants are viewed through a Eurocentric lens as
alien demons, in order to rationalize their domination and destruction.
At home, the state demonizes and criminalizes people of color in order
to rationalize targeting us for police abuse and repression, in the
name of "crime-fighting" and "security." Secret detention and
deportation of immigrants, racial profiling, police brutality,
incarceration and cut-backs of social services are all part of the
arsenal used by the state to control communities of color and constrain
their development.

As the primary victims of militarism and repression, people of color
have waged organized resistance against these scourges for centuries,
without recognition of our frontline activism by whites: We know only
too well, if others do not, that the peace movement has always been
multiracial and international. Consistent with this history, Arab,
Asian, Latino, Caribbean and African Americans were organizing in their
New York City communities before 9/11, and since the 9/11 attacks have
turned out significant numbers on several occasions. For example,
there were the 9/11 anniversary/anti-war events sponsored by Third
World Within, under the banner "No More Lost Lives," and there was the
"We Ain't Going Nowhere" march and rally in Harlem sponsored by Uptown
Youth for Peace and Justice. In addition, South Asian and Arab American
community-based groups have spearhead street protests downtown and in
Times Square against detentions and other abuses of immigrant rights
that continue to this day.

THE MOVEMENT TODAY: REACHING THE MAINSTREAM

The anti-war movement as a whole can take great pride in the national
mobilizations that brought hundreds of thousands to Washington, D.C. on
April 22, October 26 and January 18. Undaunted by the drumbeat for an
invasion of Iraq and heightened repression at home, our movement has
mounted an undeniable challenge to policies that, if allowed to
prevail, can only lead to the devastation of peoples and nations. The
success of these demonstrations was due, in no small part, to the hard
work done by diverse grass roots, neighborhood-based groups in New York
and other locales.

The energy and commitment emanating from our local anti-war
formations create a good basis for developing future peace and justice
work in our city. But to realize our potential for building a mass
movement requires, first and foremost, clarity as to who actually
constitutes the "mainstream" and why. The right, the corporate media
and elite policy makers persist in painting "mainstream America" as
white and middle class. Even many white liberals cling to the notion
that building a mass movement against war necessitates the use of
techniques and rhetoric that "don't scare away" middle class whites.
This way of thinking is anachronistic. The nation's demographics have
changed sharply over the last 40 years, even more dramatically over the
last decade, with the result that people of color are fast becoming a
majority in the U.S. More importantly, since people of color-war's
principal targets-have the greatest interest in holding back the war
tide and, thus, activists of color have the most politically developed
perspectives on the subject, they are a key source of ideas on how to
strengthen work and improve outreach. Add to this the fact that more
and more white working class and middle class families are struggling
to survive under the crushing burden of globalization's negative
effects and it becomes clear that resistance against the Bush war
machine must reflect the spectrum of needs, aspirations, goals,
intellectual resources and colors of a multiracial, multinational,
multilingual and multi-class mainstream.

Unfortunately, white supremacy and white privilege in our work present
obstacles that, if left unaddressed, will limit our ability to
consolidate an effective movement within today's realities.

ADDRESSING WHITE SUPREMACY IN THE PEACE AND JUSTICE MOVEMENT

A persistent dynamic of white supremacy/racism and white privilege
within many organizations, and the resultant perpetuation of racist
practices, takes various forms: resistance by predominantly white
organizations to sharing leadership with-much less following the
leadership of-activists and organizations of color; the failure of
predominantly white organizations to endorse or participate in anti-war
activities sponsored by people of color groups; a discussion climate
that excludes or demeans the contributions of activists/organizations
of color, and disparaging or insensitive remarks by individuals. These
practices have alienated individuals and organizations, and they have
prevented cooperative bonds from forming as we work to build broad and
deep opposition to war.

Serious attempts have been made in the past to build anti-racist/racial
justice politics among white activists. Yet we still see white
activists and predominantly white organizations acting in ways that
effectively marginalize and disrespect activists and organizations of
color in anti-war work. While many of these individuals and
organizations view themselves as anti-racist, their words and
actions-consciously or unconsciously, intentionally or not-replicate
white supremacy and white privilege. In addition, they advocate certain
positions within the movement that fail to address, and in some
instances actually support, structural white supremacy.

DEFINITIONS

What do we mean by white supremacy and white privilege? We are unaware
of any universally agreed upon definitions, but we have found those put
forth by the Challenging White Supremacy Workshop (CWS at
http://www.cwsworkshop.org) to be useful. CWS states that white supremacy is a
system, historically
constructed by white peoples, European nations and the United States, to
exploit and oppress nations and peoples of color. The point of the
system is to maintain and perpetuate wealth, power and privilege for
nations and peoples of European descent. White privilege is also a
system, institutionally based, that (1) rewards and privileges white
people solely because of their skin color and European origins; and (2)
exempts whites and European-descended peoples from oppression. White
supremacy anchors white privilege and racial oppression in our society,
meaning that it is not simply about individual prejudice. Individual
and organizational acts of racial prejudice are rooted in, and
replicate, an entire social construct of white supremacy. If we wish to
build a lasting peace and justice movement that effectively unites the
broadest possible strata of society, then our fight against racism must
be fully conscious and ongoing. We must face the issue externally in
our platforms, positions and actions, and internally in our movement
work.

EXAMPLES OF WHITE SUPREMACY & PRIVILEGE WITHIN THE NYC PEACE &
JUSTICE
MOVEMENT

Based on the foregoing definitions, here are examples of practices
that we and other movement activists have witnessed in peace and
justice activities since 9/11/2001:

Refusing to acknowledge and accept leadership from activists and
organizations of color:

* refusing to participate in people of color-led events.

* refusing to participate in broad anti-war activities with strong POC
participation or leadership, e.g., the summer split when War Resisters
League withdrew from Stand Up New York (commemoration of September
11).

* white groups starting coalitions without input from, or honest
outreach to, organizations of color and then calling their groups
"citywide." One activist dismissed the lack of input and outreach,
saying "I long ago gave up paying attention to skin colorS On such
matters, I'm with Dr. King.... What's important about people is not the
color of their skin, but the content of their character."

* white activists making strategy decisions without consulting
activists of color, whose work is critical to implementing the
decisions.

* white activists using their greater financial or volunteer resources
to attract resources, and to dominate leadership or staff positions and
decision-making ("do it my way, and I'll raise the dollars").

* variation on "divide and rule": White activists using rhetoric in a
discussion that effectively pits groups against each other,
particularly groups of color-for example, insinuating that one group
has unfairly tried to dominate space within a project that must
accommodate the interests of many different sectors.

Promoting positions that challenge the impact of war on more privileged
populations, while ignoring or even justifying its impact on people of
color and immigrants.

* refusing to recognize the centrality of white supremacy and racism in
the war drive at home and abroad. One long-time peace activist in
reference to the U.S. war against Afghanistan, "A racist war? It isn't.
Vietnam was. But the Afghans for the most part are not dark skinned. A
criminal war, yes. An illegal war, yes. An unconstitutional war, yes.
But a racist war? Bull shit."

* denying the impact on people of color of the war at home and abroad.

* denying that non-Arab people of color within the U.S. are
particularly targeted by the war.

* appealing to racism or national chauvinism in opposing the war.

Discrediting, ignoring or minimizing the history and prominent roles of
people of color in the peace and justice movement:

* "dissing" or discrediting people of color organizations.

* dismissing the roles of people of color in anti-war movements: One
movement activist claimed that Angela Davis and Muhammad Ali were not
serious anti-war activists during the Vietnam war.

* engaging in "the politics of privileged projection": Some white
activists, comfortable with a "white" peace movement, claim that
activists of color are "too busy with domestic issues" to do anti-war
work. This perception can be a cover for the white person's
enthusiastic involvement in activism against the war abroad, but
indifference to opposing the wars at home-which, after all, primarily
target communities and people of color. Apparently, it hasn't occurred
to this activist that his/her "whiteness," along with class privilege,
both enables and influences the luxury of choosing on which issues s/he
will focus.

Creating an atmosphere of marginalization, disrespect or neglect
towards people of color in anti-war meetings and events:

* white activists tending to dominate discussions and favor the most
"articulate"

* not calling on activists of color to speak and chair meetings.

* white people assuming that their experiences are the norm, and
viewing people of color's realities as the "other" or "the exception."

* judging what political approach will work with "the average person"
by the experience in white neighborhoods.

* using terms like "us" and "them."

Creating an environment in meetings, through certain actions, that is
threatening to, or uncomfortable for, immigrants

* exposing immigrants and other people of color to the risk of arrest
in civil disobedience (CD) actions, or promoting CD in communities of
color without understanding that immigrants risk jail, deportation
and/or police violence that could lead to serious injury or death.

* insensitivity to immigrants' religious and cultural practices.

Such practices reproduce in our movement the white supremacy that
permeates U.S. society. A similar dynamic involves class: those with
greater access to education, wealth and power often marginalize working
peopleS and involves gender: male supremacy creates unfavorable
conditions for women's equal participation. Most white activists don't
see how "whiteness" privileges them and perpetuates white supremacist
social relations in movement work. White activists have a
responsibility to struggle against white supremacy, a struggle that
includes: 1) Sharing leadership with, and being willing to follow the
lead of, people and organizations of color; 2) maintaining an attitude
of collectivity and not dominating discussion; 3) challenging racist
language and actions (especially within movement spaces), and 4)
prioritizing the issues, experiences and struggles of people of color.

IMPORTANCE OF LEADERSHIP OF COMMUNITIES OF COLOR

Real peace can only be achieved if our movement comes to understand,
and addresses, the racist roots of modern militarism and warfare. It
follows, therefore, that real justice can only be achieved if the
people most affected by INjustice are in the leadership of movements
seeking change. By no means do we discount the role of white activists
and predominantly white organizations within the peace and justice
movement. In order to achieve the broadest and strongest opposition to
war, we need unified action across all lines-and white communities are
obviously an integral part of that movement-building. But especially in
New York City, given its racial and ethnic composition, people of color
must have a place at the helm in coalition work. White activists and
predominantly white groups must tackle this issue directly. In a
country founded on genocide, slavery and territorial conquest, that is
still plagued by racism and by the unequal distribution of power and
resources, people of color can tell when white folks don't welcome
their input, much less their leadership. And understandably, we are
turned off of trying to work with people who dismiss, marginalize or
patronize us. In addition to treating people of color with respect,
white activists and groups need to embrace the principle of
power-sharing and the sharing of resources.

Activists of color who are on the receiving end of racist behavior face
vexing decisions about whether or how to interact with predominantly
white projects. Some opt to concentrate on building a base in their own
communities. Others work in multiracial settings, where they often find
themselves the brunt of racist dynamics. In the latter case, unpleasant
experiences have made some people skeptical about white activists'
dedication to power-sharing and fighting white supremacy. For those
activists of color who are committed to citywide organizing, despite
being tempted to dismiss the so-called "white left" (an oxymoron), it's
important that white activists indicate a willingness to engage in a
serious dialogue within the context of political struggle.

We ask peace and justice activists in NYC to reflect on the content of
this letter, discuss it and respond. How can our organizations and
coalitions best deal with these problems? We look forward to a dialogue
on the issues. Most important, we hope and expect that out of that
dialogue will come lasting changes in the ways we work together.

In solidarity,

Steve Bloom
Jean Carey Bond
Humberto Brown
Saulo Colón
Bhairavi Desai
Cherrene Horazuk
Randy Jackson
Hany Khalil
Ray Laforest
Ngô Thanh Nhàn
René Francisco Poitevin
Merle Ratner
Liz Roberts
Juliet Ucelli
Lincoln Van Sluytman


To respond to this letter, please email the signers at:
antiracistmovement at yahoo.com.