¿Que?
5th May 2011, 02:43
Please forgive me if I have left some important details out, or if I get some facts wrong. I encourage anyone to correct me if that is the case. I have a general question about class and race concerning the direct actions that occurred the night after Johannes Mehserle's verdict was announced. The reason I find this an interesting occurrence is that, if I am not mistaken, it runs counter to the narrative generally posed of anarchism vis-a-vis race and to a certain extent class. Because what I hear is that the typical anarchist is a young white male, or relatively comfortable backgrounds. In any case, the assumption is usually that the typical anarchist is a white male. The problem with this characterization of course, ignores that anarchism is an international phenomenon, and that anarchist direct action has appeared in Greece most prominently, but also italy and france among other places. And in these situations, we generally see a lot of mixing of the immigrant and indigenous movements within the anarchist milieu.
Unfortunately, the character of United States anarchism does not resemble this sort of integration, which is, to be sure, part of the tradition of anarchism, even in the American past (consider Sacco and Venzetti). At moments, I am more fearful of anarchism taking anti-immigrant attitudes, mostly among the least educated rabble. But similarly, the immigrant populations in America have not taken up anarchism. The Zapatistas have a sort of autonomous thing going, but this is mostly geographically southern Mexico. Voice from workers themselves are conspicuously abstent, and instead, the narrative is put forward by Hispanic advocacy organizations like LULAC or NCLR.
With the black population, the situation is similar, in spite of a different historical context. There is a predominantly working class black population, but they are mostly being advocated for, rather than heard. Indeed, in many cases, such as some prominent "cultural" social scientific theories, the blame for the suffering of communities like Oakland, against the violence of the State and capital, is being laid squarely on the deficient culture of African Americans. On languages that limit rather than subvert and things like that. It is unfortunate that these cultural theorists are very often black themselves, although of more comfortable means than working class people. And these theorists are just as quick to point out the race characteristics of the anarchist movement (should you ask them) as they are the deficiencies of "ghetto" "hood" "gansta" black culture.
And then there was the BART shooting, in which a characteristically anarchist but also characteristically black-black block carried out direct actions against symbols of capitalism in revenge (that's right) of the death of Oscar Grant by a ruthless member of the enforcers of private property. How do we make sense of this? Am I being naive? Is there anything written on the matter?
Thanks.
Unfortunately, the character of United States anarchism does not resemble this sort of integration, which is, to be sure, part of the tradition of anarchism, even in the American past (consider Sacco and Venzetti). At moments, I am more fearful of anarchism taking anti-immigrant attitudes, mostly among the least educated rabble. But similarly, the immigrant populations in America have not taken up anarchism. The Zapatistas have a sort of autonomous thing going, but this is mostly geographically southern Mexico. Voice from workers themselves are conspicuously abstent, and instead, the narrative is put forward by Hispanic advocacy organizations like LULAC or NCLR.
With the black population, the situation is similar, in spite of a different historical context. There is a predominantly working class black population, but they are mostly being advocated for, rather than heard. Indeed, in many cases, such as some prominent "cultural" social scientific theories, the blame for the suffering of communities like Oakland, against the violence of the State and capital, is being laid squarely on the deficient culture of African Americans. On languages that limit rather than subvert and things like that. It is unfortunate that these cultural theorists are very often black themselves, although of more comfortable means than working class people. And these theorists are just as quick to point out the race characteristics of the anarchist movement (should you ask them) as they are the deficiencies of "ghetto" "hood" "gansta" black culture.
And then there was the BART shooting, in which a characteristically anarchist but also characteristically black-black block carried out direct actions against symbols of capitalism in revenge (that's right) of the death of Oscar Grant by a ruthless member of the enforcers of private property. How do we make sense of this? Am I being naive? Is there anything written on the matter?
Thanks.