-
Complicity with Racism
Matt Robesch's piece on "The
Digressive Movement" [Free Press May/June 1998] offers
some thought-provoking criticisms of the left and our apparent
inability to get our act together. Unfortunately, in his zeal
to attack progressives' "lower, fascistic instincts (the darker
side of political correctness no liberal wants to talk about),"
Robesch contributes to a much more virulent and historically tenacious
problem within left politics: namely, complicity with racism.
While there's a lot to be said for getting focused
on the big picture, Robesch consistently denies any connection
to that big picture in racist imagery disseminated through "private"
channels like a Taco Bell ad campaign. He reduces the perpetuation
of racist stereotypes to an issue of "hurt feelings," as though
people of color were oversensitive whiners with no legitimate
complaints about how they are portrayed in the media. There may
be tactical problems with mounting a demo against ObaChines's
poster, but that's not the same as glibly writing off concern
over the tenacity of racism as nothing more than offended sensibilities.
Robesch suggests people work against I-200 instead.
Sure, that makes sense. But where does he think white people get
these crazy ideas about Mexicans and Asians and African Americans?
Where does support from I-200 come from? Those pervasive, seemingly
innocuous images have a cumulative effect that does much to normalize
unconscious racism for white people who don't think critically
about them.
Robesch's article, for all its purported radicalism,
is in fact very much in line with a long and sorry tradition of
white leftists blowing off concerns about racism, dismissing the
leadership of people of color, and complacently assuming that
racism is just a matter of "hurt feelings" like those they themselves
are familiar with. With the recent resurgence of labor activism,
this less savory aspect of labor history is making a similar but
far less welcome comeback.
-
-
-
---------------------------
-
[Matt Robesch replies: Questioning two inpertinent local
battles the Left recently chose for itself does not make someone
complicit with racism. Claiming so seems more a gut reaction
than an intellectual one. I was merely pointing out a few of
the ways which progressives have been shooting themselves in
the foot for well over two decades now. Micro-managing politically
correct ideologies by protesting every single little thing that
offends you isn't progress at all; it's wasted energy. Such
behavior is akin to some kind of group obsessive-compulsive
disorder. It doesn't draw people to your cause... usually it
has the opposite effect. No one likes a self-righteous jerk
no matter what side of the political spectrum they're from or
what they are protesting.
As for media stereotypes: Every single person
portrayed on TV is a stereotype simply because they are projected
images with no essence of reality. They're puppets controlled
by writers, producers, editors, camera people, etc. (please
see: "Deconstructing the Idiot Box," )
If you don't like the way the media is portraying a group you
identify with, turn off your TV. Better yet, become the
media yourself. Don't just picket and complain... tell your
damned story! Personally, I'm far more interested in who you
are as an individual than I am in hearing what you think the
fake people on TV should say and do. Fighting corporate TV is
like shadow-boxing.
Humanity needs unity. Short of stopping an alien
invasion ala "Independence Day," there are very few causes that
the vast majority of earthlings can relate to on equal terms.
Saving Earth's environment from irreparable destruction comes
to mind as one. Stopping multi-national corporations from initiating
a modern global feudalism may be another. The Left is the only
movement philosophically equipped to deliver such a movement.
Perhaps the solution the Left is looking for
is a simple repackaging of all the seperate minority causes
(Gay rights, Latino rights, Black autonomy, Indian sovereignty,
etc, etc. etc.) into one large majority cause called Human Rights.
In some ways this is already happening but, mostly, it isn't.
I imagine this movement would be better equipped philosophically
to deal with the small issues (stereotyping, etc.) at the same
time that it mobilizes to fight the larger more important fights.
As long as said movement could keep the term "human rights"
from becoming devalued and ridiculed the same way the term "politically
correct" has been, I don't see how it could fail.
As things stand in the US today, I adhere to
the notion that an overabundance of mini-PC struggles is killing
the Left and, as a result, jeopardizing the existence of everyone
on the friggin' planet! The United States needs a strong
internal progressive force more than any other nation on Earth...
and it doesn't have one.]
-
-
-
[Matt Robesch adds 3/6/2000: Oh yes
it does!!
-
-
-
The Seattle WTO protests
of Nov/Dec 1999 were historic and important because Americans
were able to see (for the first time in 30 years!) unprecedented
unity of progressive causes such as organized labor, environmentalists,
human rights advocates and dozens of smaller issue specific groups.
Upwards of 60,000 citizens from around the world banded together
to protest with one voice the existence of an undemocratic organization
(the WTO) that serves as nothing more than a tool of greedy global
corporations.
-
Think about it: progressive forces shut down an
American city!! The American Left is alive and well and should
give itself a pat on the back.
-
-
But, by all means, keep up the fight!]
|
|