White people. Come get your Bernie Sanders Loving Cousin

[heyjude]

The problem with telling ‘white allies’ to shutup because ‘they don’t know the struggle’
by Justin King • August 12, 2015


Washington, DC (TFC) – There is a new theory that presents the idea that unless you’ve been a victim of a specific form of oppression, your views on the subject are worthless. That you should take a backseat to those that have been personally wronged. This theory takes many forms but has become most prominent in the #BlackLivesMatter organization and in certain feminist groups. On the surface, the idea may seem to make some sense. How can you really speak of an injustice under a system that you haven’t experienced? How can you possibly understand the problems if you don’t see them first hand? How can a “white ally” even think that they understand how it feels to be black in America?

There are three major issues with this theory that cause it to be a totally untenable position. The first is the focus on emotional perspectives rather than the idea being presented. The second is that the overriding theory is completely false, because if it were true, it would apply across all systems. The third is the exclusionary nature of the statement, which in many cases can weaken a movement.

In the above questions, the major fallacy of this theory presents itself. They are all based on qualifying whatever the speaker is saying on emotion and personal experience, rather than the quality of the idea. The idea is what matters, not the pigmentation of the speaker’s skin. An idea should be judged on its own merits.


If the idea being presented is bad, it will fail on its own merits. When people take this route and inform others that their input is not needed, it makes pragmatic people wonder if they are interested in achieving a victory or maintaining control of a movement and inflating their own ego. Perhaps they are simply regurgitating something they’ve heard without actually thinking about it. When you state that somebody’s input is not needed because of their race, you are quite literally saying that it is more important for this to be a black, Irish, women’s, or whatever dominated movement than it is for the movement to be successful.

It also stops the open discussion of ideas. If a “white ally” has an incorrect perception, how can that perception possibly be corrected if they have been silenced from even expressing an opinion?

As activists, we have to be pragmatic. We have to be solution-oriented, not event-oriented. We’ve all witnessed marches that achieve little more than networking between activists and perhaps boosting morale. If the event doesn’t have tangible goals set and a strategy to achieve those goals, it might as well have been held in somebody’s basement.


If you’re reading this, and you know who Harriet Tubman is, you might know who William Still is, but you probably can’t name a single one of the Quakers that provided logistical support for the Underground Railroad. The first was a conductor on the railroad, the second is widely seen as “the father of the Underground Railroad.” Even though he receives little fanfare, his multi-state network freed hundreds of slaves. His network relied on assistance from white Quakers. Their support and ideas were practical and effective. They weren’t discarded by Still because of the color of their skin.

Emotion doesn’t really matter when it comes to formulating a plan or an idea for a course of action. Either the idea is good or it is bad.

This leads us to the second major problem with the theory being presented: it is plainly false. We can all agree that there is a system inside the United States that is designed to exert downward pressure on any minority group. Having existed inside that system does not immediately qualify someone as the person whose ideas are the most effective or the most accurate.


Take this theory and apply it to any other system. One example that might strike home for the biggest supporters of this theory is the police themselves.
“You don’t know what it’s like to be cop and deal with scum all day.”
“You’ve never had to worry if you’re going home at the end of the shift.”
“You don’t know what it’s like to make split second decisions.”
This is the exact same theory at work. If you believe in this theory, how can you possibly be at a police accountability rally without having been a cop? If you believe that someone that has not experienced something is incapable of participating in the conversation, why bother?

To take it to another extreme, would you ever say “this doctor has never had cancer, how can she possibly offer a solution?” Do you see how silly this sounds?

At first glance, I am a poster child for white privilege. I am a native-born, college-educated, white heterosexual male with blond hair and blue eyes who happens to be married to a native-born, college-educated, white heterosexual female with blonde hair and blue eyes. Our kids are blond haired with blue eyes. Our dog is a German Shepherd. We live in a subdivision. I drive a late model Jeep. Quite frankly, our family photos look like recruitment posters for the Aryan Nation. I won the white privilege lottery.

Because of this genetic and geographic fluke, this theory asserts that I cannot offer anything to any cause because, generally-speaking, my demographic is not currently oppressed. I would beg to differ. I would humbly submit to the censors at large that the value of ideas formed on the basis of years of opposing injustice far outweigh my lack of melanin.

As somebody who has been called a “white ally” on numerous occasions, please don’t call me that. By classifying me as that, you make my support and participation about race, when it isn’t. The term literally makes my skin crawl. I don’t support a cause based on skin tone. I don’t care if you’re from Palestine, Kurdistan, Mexico, Ireland, or Compton. If I’m standing with you, it’s because you are fighting against injustice in a practical and effective manner.

Some issues obviously have a racial element. Yes, black lives matter. Yes, the struggle with police brutality impacts black communities far more than white communities. Yes, I will stand side by side with a #BlackLivesMatter group during a police accountability action. I will use my white privilege to keep pressure on law enforcement and keep them focused on something other than the #BlackLivesMatter group. However, I am not there because an unarmed black kid was killed. I am there because an unarmed kid was killed. I am there because there is a pattern of abuse that needs to be corrected. While others in the crowd may be (rightfully) motivated by a sense of racial preservation, I am not. My involvement has nothing to do with race. Please don’t make it about race.

Many, myself included, see the focus on race in the same way we would see putting a band-aid on a bullet wound. It doesn’t really address the underlying issue. If you were to place the average American of every race in a room together, would they have more in common with each other or the “leaders” of their respective races? To take it further, if you held a dinner and invited an average person from every country on the planet, would the dinner guests have more in common with the other guests or their respective heads of state? The system is broken. Employing divisive tactics helps the system at large, not the people. I will happily stand with those trying to correct symptoms, but not at the expense of strengthening the disease.

Movements like those that have recently adopted this theory are alienating those that would stand with them and depriving themselves of resources. Social movements of any kind need to remember that the “social” part of that relates to society. Winning the support of society at large is imperative to success. Is it possible to win the support of society while telling more than 60% of that society that their opinion does not matter, and that they shouldn’t express an idea even if it supports the movement?

It seems fairly unlikely to me. The good news is that I’m a white guy, so it doesn’t matter what I think, right?

[tacosforlife]

Aug 12, 2015 16:13:34 GMT -5 heyjude said:

Some issues obviously have a racial element. Yes, black lives matter. Yes, the struggle with police brutality impacts black communities far more than white communities. Yes, I will stand side by side with a #BlackLivesMatter group during a police accountability action. I will use my white privilege to keep pressure on law enforcement and keep them focused on something other than the #BlackLivesMatter group. However, I am not there because an unarmed black kid was killed. I am there because an unarmed kid was killed. I am there because there is a pattern of abuse that needs to be corrected. While others in the crowd may be (rightfully) motivated by a sense of racial preservation, I am not. My involvement has nothing to do with race. Please don’t make it about race.

[heyjude]

You should have seen my face reading this.

"I don't support BLM because it's about black people."

[heyjude]

To be fair, I don't know if this writer is a Feel the Berner but it was shared on FB by someone who drank the Bernie kool aid hard. And since the Bernie people are the only ones who seem upset about BLM, it seemed like a reasonable interpretation.

[elleblue]

Omfg. Stop it white people, just stop.


And please, for the love of gawd, just listen for now. It doesn't mean you can't form an opinion or even express it (eventually) but it's time to let others speak. For too long this conversation has been one sided and that's just not how conversations work.

[tacosforlife]

Aug 12, 2015 16:13:34 GMT -5 heyjude said:

The good news is that I’m a white guy, so it doesn’t matter what I think, right?

I also just CANNOT EVEN with this "poor, marginalized me" act. This stupid piece talks about action. Well, if you, Mr. White McSplainer, have an idea for a concrete action that, let's say, police departments can take to reduce the danger that black people face, and that concrete action has not already been suggested by someone, I cannot imagine that anyone would shout that down because you're white. But before you speak, you should LISTEN TO THE EXPERIENCES OF BLACK PEOPLE. This is not hard to understand. I welcome ideas from men on how to combat the patriarchy, but I prefer if they hear me out on WHAT THE ACTUAL PROBLEM IS before they start tossing around ideas.

I mean, I am a wordy motherfucker. If I have learned to sit back and listen more than I talk when black people talk about issues they face because of their race, then anyone should be able to do it.

[LadySusan]

Damn. Where did this even get published? (Oh please don't name some publication that I respect).

This is terrible writing. I thought it was probably some young college kid until I got to the part about having a perfect blonde wife and perfect blonde spawn.

[heyjude]

It came from something called "the fifth column."

[NewOrleans]

[gpw]

[ESF]

As somebody who has been called a “white ally” on numerous occasions, 

Is this his way of saying, "I have black friends"? 

[LadySusan]

Aug 12, 2015 18:18:23 GMT -5 ESF said:

As somebody who has been called a “white ally” on numerous occasions, 

Is this his way of saying, "I have black 'friends'"? 

You forgot to add the dick quotes.

[mrsukyankee]

I hate this person and I don't even know them. Idiot.

[Deleted]

My take away from reading this, and the posts and responses over the last few weeks on this forum and elsewhere as far as the whole BLM thing goes is as follows:

Don't get involved - anything you say as white person is wrong.





Which is why I have said nothing.

[mrsukyankee]

A friend of mine, who is white and teaches about '-isms' wrote this on Facebook and I think it's something that speaks to this issue:

Dear White Friends: People--mostly white people--keep asking me my opinion about Marissa Johnson and Mara Jacqueline Willaford, the #‎BlackLivesMatter activists who courageously commandeered the microphone during the Bernie Sanders event in Seattle. I started to engage on these matters, then realized what was happening and stopped. My opinion is that as a white person committed to racial justice and the liberation of Black Lives, it is not my place to have an opinion on the ways in which people who are marginalized choose to enact the fight for their liberation. Rather, it is my place to stand with and next to and in support of Black Activists in whichever way they choose to struggle for their liberation. In fact, my own liberation is tied to my willingness to do so. So please, White Friends, if you are spending a single ounce of energy debating about the tactics and strategies of Black Activists fighting for Black Lives anywhere, STOP NOW. Then recognize that if you feel your opinion on this matter counts for anything in the scope of the bigger movement, that's a reflection of white entitlement and supremacy. And if you feel like your time is well-spent debating about whether Black Activists should be doing something different to win their liberation, you are clearly avoiding the important work of racial justice. Here I remind myself that standing in solidarity with an oppressed community means giving myself to that movement to be used in ways determined by the people whose liberation is at stake. I remind myself, as well, to remember, once again, that my own liberation is at stake should I choose, as white people so often do when it comes to racial justice, to try to dictate the conditions of my involvement based on my own fragility. Better to get the hell out of the way. The debate among white people when it comes to racial justice should never, ever, ever be a debate about the strategies and tactics adopted by Black Activists and other Activists of Color. If there is any debate at all, it should be a debate about the best possible ways to prepare ourselves and other White people to be true comrades, true co-conspirators rather than white liberal barriers to racial justice.

[eponinepontmercy]

Aug 14, 2015 9:47:51 GMT -5 @eveer said:

My take away from reading this, and the posts and responses over the last few weeks on this forum and elsewhere as far as the whole BLM thing goes is as follows:

Don't get involved - anything you say as white person is wrong.





Which is why I have said nothing.

That's not the impression I've gotten at all.  It's more that white people need to let black people speak about their own experiences and not dismiss them.  We should be doing more listening to black people than telling them what their cause should be and how to further it.  We can be partners without being paternalistic. 

[downtoearth]

I had an interesting conversation with a coworker who is very liberal and loves Bernie (and so does his wife - even more than him based on her recent FB stuff), but thought it was inappropriate for the BLM protestors to confront him. We had a good discussion on our drive to our field site and I think I gave him some things to consider that he hadn't. Before we got into too much he did say, "Well Bernie and Hillary have the same stance and BLM isn't going after her!" I disputed some of that based on what I know about HRC's involvement in BLM and her direct responses to recent black deaths.

He also said that the main protestor at Bernie's made her FB public and "is a Republican and has posted pro-Sarah Palin things and that she's a Republican b/c at least they are honest that they are racist and she respects that more than white liberals who aren't honest." I didn't have a much for that since I didn't know, but told him, "Well, I am shocked by that, but just because she's a Republican doesn't mean that Black lives don't matter - it means that she chooses to be in a political party that overtly discriminates and has to fight there and for the covert discrimination outside of her political party in her community also."

[2curlydogs]

I refuse to claim this asshole.


Look. The discussions over the last several of months on here have been invaluable. I've kept my mouth shut, but I've been reading. While I've known about the issues that the Black Lives Matters movement has been bringing to light (living in MKE as a conscientious lib it'd be hard NOT to have known about them), I've also been guilty of not thinking of all of the repercussions.

Case in point - the "whitewashing" of POC in photos.

Yesterday I had an account team ask me if I could lighten up a photo because it was making some of the people's faces hard to see. It wasn't that you couldn't see his face, it was just he was very dark-skinned and wearing a baseball cap, so that cast a shadow on his face.

I refused. I (briefly) explained why. My AT contact's eyes widened and said "I never thought of that."

I'm not sure I would have refused that request a year or so ago. I would have thought "yeah, we want to see his face more clearly." and gone into photoshop.

These are things worth bringing to light. These are things worth hearing.

And homeboy need to go sat down, shut up, and listen.

[downtoearth]

Aug 14, 2015 13:01:38 GMT -5 1234FIF! said:

Aug 14, 2015 12:40:29 GMT -5 downtoearth said:

I had an interesting conversation with a coworker who is very liberal and loves Bernie (and so does his wife - even more than him based on her recent FB stuff), but thought it was inappropriate for the BLM protestors to confront him. We had a good discussion on our drive to our field site and I think I gave him some things to consider that he hadn't. Before we got into too much he did say, "Well Bernie and Hillary have the same stance and BLM isn't going after her!" I disputed some of that based on what I know about HRC's involvement in BLM and her direct responses to recent black deaths.

He also said that the main protestor at Bernie's made her FB public and "is a Republican and has posted pro-Sarah Palin things and that she's a Republican b/c at least they are honest that they are racist and she respects that more than white liberals who aren't honest." I didn't have a much for that since I didn't know, but told him, "Well, I am shocked by that, but just because she's a Republican doesn't mean that Black lives don't matter - it means that she chooses to be in a political party that overtly discriminates and has to fight there and for the covert discrimination outside of her political party in her community also."

Yes, this argument is odd. Only democrat/liberal black lives matter? Conservative/GOP black people shouldn't care about black people's lives?

This actually spread into a discussion of why alllivesmatter was negative.  He hadn't understood that it was a negating the idea that black lives haven't and still don't matter as much as others and we had a good discussion of this. 

He later asked me where I learned all this b/c it didn't seem like it was in the regular news in our neck of the woods and even his very liberal friends.  I tried to dodge that b/c he's a coworker that shares my office. So I told him through my "wise Black internet friends and keeping up with politics" and gave him a few people on twitter to follow.  

[bourbonfan]

Came across this one in one of my "Bernie" groups on FB, with the caption "Important read. many of us acted badly."

rhrealitycheck.org/ablc/2015/08/11/blacklivesmatter-hurt-feelings-white-progressives/

#BlackLivesMatter More Than the Hurt Feelings of White Progressives™
Imani Gandy

by Imani Gandy, Senior Legal Analyst, RH Reality Check

Yesterday morning, I tweeted something that now seems irrational.

I tweeted that there was no way I would vote for Bernie Sanders, and that is entirely due to the relentless campaign of harassment to which some of his more overzealous supporters have subjected me and other Black people on Twitter and Facebook. I even mentioned, as I have in the past, that I would vote for Hillary Clinton out of spite even though I have not yet forgiven her for the racist campaign that she ran in 2008 against President Obama.

As soon as I tweeted it, I knew it was irrational. Why would I refuse to vote for a person whose political positions are most aligned with mine simply because his followers have treated me with overwhelming disrespect, condescension, and flat-out ugliness? It’s irrational. I admit it.

But do you know what else is irrational? The behavior of Sanders’ fanatical supporters in response to the disruption of #BlackLivesMatter activists at Netroots Nation and the Sanders rally in Seattle led by Marissa Johnson and Mara Willaford this past weekend.

The last few weeks have exposed some real ugliness in the progressive movement, ugliness that has been simmering just below the surface for a long time, but which, due to Black women’s increasing recognition of our political power coupled with leadership in the #BlackLivesMatter movement and unapologetic commitment to dismantling white supremacy, has erupted into a fountain of White Progressive™ racism.

And it is appalling.

So it is in that context that I frustratedly tweeted that I would never vote for Bernie Sanders.

But the thing about irrationality is that sometimes it subsides and rational thought takes hold. And so it did with me.

Yes, I am tired of being belittled, and slandered, and talked down to, but that doesn’t mean that I should sacrifice my well-being and the well-being of my community out of spite. That would be ridiculous and self-defeating. And I suspect that the many Black people that I have seen who have echoed my sentiment will change their tune in the upcoming months.

But for that to happen, Sanders’ overzealous supporters, many of whom are fundamentally indistinguishable from Ron Paul supporters in 2012, need to back off.

Sanders’ fanatics have been viciously harassing Black people on Twitter and Facebook for weeks now—ever since the #BlackLivesMatter activists stood up during the presidential town hall at Netroots Nation and demanded that Sanders provide substantive answers about what he would do about the epidemic of police violence in the Black community.

In the wake of that protest, Sanders supporters took to Twitter to condescend, patronize, and belittle Black people, talking to us as if we are stupid and don’t know what’s best for us, and therefore should listen to our White Progressive ™ betters lest we usher in a Trump presidency or a Clinton presidency or whomever is the Boogey Man du jour.

These supporters have twisted and perverted what is a movement about the liberation of Black people and turned it into a weapon to be used against us. They threaten to withdraw their support in protesting state violence against Black people. One Twitter user frankly told me that he was sick of #BlackLivesMatter and would actually vote for people who will “put you in your place.”

In the wake of the Seattle protest over the weekend, Sanders’ fanatical supporters behaved just as horribly as they had after the Netroots Nation protest.

If this progressive rage—primarily white progressive rage—at Black voters continues, one has to wonder whether or not Sanders can be defined by the company he keeps, and whether that company will sink any chance he has at becoming the next Democratic nominee.

And let me be clear: It won’t be Sanders’ fault if he loses the primary. It will be the fault of his supporters.

Despite reacting poorly to the protests when they were happening, Sanders has been doing all the right things.

Mere days after the Netroots protest, Bernie Sanders began tweeting about #BlackLivesMatter and #SayHerName. Indeed, the day after the protest, he said Sandra Bland’s name at a rally in Dallas.

And in a move I consider savvy, he hired Symone Sanders, a young Black organizer with the Coalition for Juvenile Justice and supporter of the #BlackLivesMatter movement as his press secretary. And whatever your view of the hire—in the New Republic, Jamil Smith writes that “hiring Symone Sanders, a black woman, as his press secretary … can’t be expected to mollify the movement. #BlackLivesMatter wants policies for black people, not black people for his policies”—it is undeniable that the #BlackLivesMatter protesters are inspiring Bernie Sanders to address the concerns of Black women.

On the morning after the Seattle protest, Sanders published a page to his website that addresses racial justice, and specifically addresses police violence on its own terms. His racial justice platform includes Physical Violence (i.e., police violence), Political Violence (i.e., disenfranchisement), Legal Violence (i.e., mass incarceration of people of color), and his bread and butter, Economic Violence (unemployment and income inequality.)

This would not have happened were it not for the #BlackLivesMatter protesters.

Indeed, Smith writes, “A campaign representative reached out to me to say that those proposals, in the works for the three weeks since Netroots, were derived from a speech that’s been on the site since July 25.”

Just yesterday, Bernie Sanders tackled the issue of institutional racism at a rally in Los Angeles.

And let’s not forget that immediately after the Netroots protest, Democracy for America, the organization founded by Howard Dean in 2004, issued a press release via email stating the following:

After hearing the calls of our friends in the #BlackLivesMatter movement, that’s exactly what we intend to do. Here is what Democracy for America is committing to as an organization with a mission to elect more and better Democrats across the country:

We will ask every single candidate who asks for our support what they have done, and what they will do to stand up alongside the Movement for Black Lives while confronting structural racism within our country’s culture of white supremacy. As TIME magazine reported, this will apply to candidates running up and down the ballot—from local and state level candidates to the 2016 Democratic presidential contenders.
DFA will be working with campaigns to communicate with voters more often and more effectively about race by actively helping campaigns poll on racial justice issues and amplify messaging that takes on structural racism.

None of this would have happened if not for the #BlackLivesMatter protesters.

The #BlackLivesMatter activists are changing the political conversation. Black women are flexing our political muscles. And it is obvious that Bernie Sanders and the progressive infrastructure is listening.

The only people who continue to stalwartly refuse to listen are his fanatical supporters. They stubbornly continue to claim that the protests are stupid and counterproductive despite clear evidence to the contrary, and they express their displeasure in rhetoric steeped in racism and misogynoir.

And it’s profoundly depressing.

Ultimately, Bernie Sanders has a coalition problem. His coalition is comprised of primarily white progressives and liberals, unsurprising for a man who hails from a state that is 94 percent white. And when a vocal section of that coalition thinks belittling and harassing Black people is a smart way to encourage Black people to vote for Bernie Sanders, Bernie Sanders likely has a larger problem on his hands than he probably realizes.

Look at the numbers. Black women are the most loyal and reliable Democratic voting bloc. We won the election for Obama in 2012. Black voter turnout surpassed white voter turnout in 2012. We won the gubernatorial election for Terry McAuliffe in Virginia.

No Democratic candidate can win without the support of Black voters, particularly Black women. And now that that is clear, we are no longer content for Democrats to take our votes for granted. The crisis in our community is too grave to blindly support a candidate and then hope they’ll get around to addressing our issues. We’ve been down that road before.

And when we see Sanders supporters entertaining conspiracy theories about the #BlackLivesMatter movement being funded by George Soros or Hillary Clinton, we have to wonder why it is easier for white and non-Black progressives to believe in ludicrous theories about #BlackLivesMatter attempting to destroy the progressive movement or destroy Bernie Sanders than it is to believe that the movement is beyond partisan politics—that the Black women who are standing up in protest are fighting for their very lives and the lives of their children.

The name-calling and slander of #BlackLivesMatter supporters and activists, particularly Black women, by white and non-Black progressives is truly shameful.

Ben Cohen at The Daily Banter called the protesters “idiots.”

Hamilton Nolan at Gawker called them “stupid.”

The staff of Ring of Fire Radio wrote a truly hateful post in which they complained that the #BlackLivesMatter movement was too focused on Black queer women—because God forbid a movement decenter whiteness—and that Black lesbians (i.e., the founders of #BlackLivesMatter) were trying to destroy Bernie Sanders and the progressive movement. (That post has since been removed.)

Marissa Johnson, one of the women who led the Seattle protest, has been smeared in a blog post being circulated on Patheos as well as a fact-free blog post on PoliticusUSA (which is a website I formerly respected and read regularly) as a “Sarah Palin supporter” and a “radical Christian.” (She supported Palin when she was 17, and no longer does now that she is 24—not that it matters since Black Sarah Palin supporters have a right to protest being gunned down in the streets just as much as any other Black person; and she is an evangelical Christian, but not a right-wing evangelical Christian.)

In addition, a group of progressives have been attempting to discredit and smear me by digging through my work history as a junior associate in a law firm working on foreclosure cases for banks, tweeting screenshots of court documents they dug up—and paid for!—on PACER, and penning blog posts that refer to me as a “former foreclosure litigator” instead of referencing the work that I have been doing for the past six years, which is racial and reproductive justice activism. These progressives—two of whom, Rania Khalek and Max Blumenthal, are respected journalists in the movement for Palestinian liberation—thought it reasonable to attack and criticize me for progressing from the corporate work that I did for banks in 2009 to social justice.

All of the above is just a tiny sample of the ongoing harassment of Black people on social media by Sanders fanatics.

These are the same people who will swear up and down that they are your allies, right up until the protest for Black lives inconveniences them in some way or they disagree with the activists’ tactics.

It boggles the mind.

To those primarily white and non-Black progressives spreading conspiracy theories about #BlackLivesMatter being funded by Soros or paid by the Clinton campaign as if it is so unfathomable that a group of Black women would be politically savvy enough to organize protests without backing from a rich white savior like Soros or the Clintons—I can only say that your behavior is fundamentally anti-progressive and practically indistinguishable from the behavior of your average Tea Partier or Rush Limbaugh enthusiast.

And to those white and non-Black progressives who are not buying into the more outlandish conspiracy theories, but are nevertheless criticizing the protests as rude, ineffective, stupid, or inconvenient, and who have penned articles offering entirely unwanted and unneeded advice to these brave Black women, I will only say this: Your opinion doesn’t matter.

As Monique Teal recently wrote for Daily Kos,

Posting that you don’t understand the strategy behind a tactic exposes you as clinging to white supremacy. Allies don’t decide the strategy of an oppressed group, they support the strategy said group develops. Period. Stop telling us that we need your validation of our humanity. Because that’s what you’re saying every time you talk about “strategy.” You can house your privilege in a thousand ways but ultimately, telling people to shut up because you don’t like what they are saying and how they are organizing makes you an oppressor.

You may be inclined to point to disagreement among Black people about the tactics of the #BlackLivesMatter activists and glom on to that disagreement to voice your own disagreement.

Don’t.

There is certainly disagreement within the movement about tactics, but that’s a conversation to be had by and among Black people about the liberation of Black people. It’s simply not your place.

That is not to say that we as Black people do not welcome white allies. Of course we do. But that allyship cannot be conditioned upon respectability politics or upon Black people acting in a way that makes you comfortable or else. That’s not allyship. That’s a threat.

If you intend to fight with us for our lives, you cannot wield your allyship as a Sword of Damocles to be dropped on our heads as soon as #BlackLivesMatter activists protest, in your view, the wrong candidate, at the wrong time, in the wrong space.

I have seen far too many fragile white progressives frustratedly exclaim, “You’ve lost an ally to your cause!”

First, allyship is not an identity that can be self-declared. Being an ally is a process. And it can be a grueling and unpleasant process, especially for those who have never had to wrestle with decentering whiteness and centering Blackness instead.

Second, if you are truly a white ally, you recognize that #BlackLivesMatter isn’t “our” cause. It’s a cause for social justice. It’s your cause too. And if you believe that threatening to retract your support is a viable threat, know this: It is not. It is actually a relief because when push comes to shove, Black people need white allies who will be in the trenches with us, not fair-weather audience participants.

I understand that this may be hard for some of you to read. You may be angry at me. You may feel diminished because you are likely accustomed to the warm blanket of whiteness in progressive spaces, and are resistant to centering Black lives and Black issues. Some of you have never been told that your opinion doesn’t matter. And your initial reaction may be outrage or to think that I’m racist or that I hate white people.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Besides, the issue is not whether I or any #BlackLivesMatter activist or supporter hates white people. The issue, as Seattle protester and activist Marissa Johnson so succinctly put it in her radio interview with This Week in Blackness Prime (which you can check out in the video below), is whether or not you love Black people and are personally accountable to Black people.

Loving Black people is different than not hating Black people. Loving Black people is different than not standing in opposition to Black people. Loving Black people is different than tolerating Black people. If you love Black people and you, as a non-Black progressive, believe that #BlackLivesMatter is your cause, then fight with us. If you don’t or you’re not sure, then we will fight on without you. But believe me: The fight will continue. The disruptions will continue. The demands for recognition that our lives matter will continue.

The bottom line is this: #BlackLivesMatter activists simply do not have time to deal with white fragility. It may sound harsh, but Black lives matter more than white feelings. We are dying in the street. 314 of us so far since the killing of Mike Brown on August 9, 2014. Our community is in crisis.

By all indications, Bernie Sanders recognizes that our community is in crisis.

You should follow his lead.

I want to be as enthusiastic about Bernie Sanders as many of you are. But for that to happen, the harassment that I and many others are facing at the hands of his overzealous supporters must end.

[Deleted]

Aug 14, 2015 11:41:38 GMT -5 1234FIF! said:

Aug 14, 2015 9:47:51 GMT -5 @eveer said:

My take away from reading this, and the posts and responses over the last few weeks on this forum and elsewhere as far as the whole BLM thing goes is as follows:

Don't get involved - anything you say as white person is wrong.





Which is why I have said nothing.

I should add that your perspective as a non-native American watching all this play out would be a valuable contribution IMO.

I guess what I am seeing is people attacking Bernie, and various other white people, who are not fully up to speed with what is going on (me included) getting...lets say scolded...for trying to help. Maybe their help is not that great, maybe they do not understand everything, but they are on the same side as BLM, as I am.
But I am a white man - of course I could never understand the intricacies of how a black man would feel, or any of that. I am aware of both my privilege and how that blinds me to things - I don't know what I don't know.
I do understand right and wrong though, and I do understand injustice, and it makes me furious whats going on. All this shit with the police force's very obvious racism, and shooting unarmed black men and everything in Fergusson etc. I swing between shock and anger and cynicism and back to anger with everything I am reading.
Incidentally, I was just as furious with the Rodney King verdict when I was a teen in the UK, and I knew even less being young, middle class, white and in the UK. True, I listened to a lot of Public Enemy lol, but that was all I knew of the black experience - PE and NWA. However, any rational person of any colour could see that the Rodney King thing was fucked up, just as all the current stuff is fucked up. Then, like now, I cannot understand the on the ground realities for a black person in the USA. That does not stop me from knowing injustice and the anger that generates. I certainly don't agree with everything in the original post, and I am very aware that white people need to be very careful about what they say and do around these issues.
But on the other hand, why attack Bernie? Or this guy? Correct his wrong assumptions, sure, but why attack a supporter, even if misguided?
For the politicians, out of all the current crop of prez hopefuls (except maybe Hilary) Bernie has the longest record of fighting for justice etc. He is trying to do the right thing as far as I can see. As a politician, he needs to sort his shit out and get it right, even more than the bloke who wrote this article, but compared to Lindsay Graham or Donald Trump? Seems like the least deserving of the bunch.
I also have no problem with protesters. I am fine with them doing what ever they need to do to get the point across because otherwise nothing will get done. So they have my full support. 
But I read the original post, didn't agree with all of it but it seemed to me someone trying to do the right thing, then saw a bunch of posts berating him. I just don't see what good that does. Educate, sure Im all for that.
The message I am getting atm is "if you are white, shut up and help. But mostly, shut up" lol. Maybe that is what is wanted, in which case, message understood. It just doesn't make a great deal of sense to me.

[Deleted]

Aug 14, 2015 20:38:55 GMT -5 1234FIF! said:

Aug 14, 2015 19:20:41 GMT -5 @eveer said:

I guess what I am seeing is people attacking Bernie, and various other white people, who are not fully up to speed with what is going on (me included) getting...lets say scolded...for trying to help. Maybe their help is not that great, maybe they do not understand everything, but they are on the same side as BLM, as I am.
But I am a white man - of course I could never understand the intricacies of how a black man would feel, or any of that. I am aware of both my privilege and how that blinds me to things - I don't know what I don't know.
I do understand right and wrong though, and I do understand injustice, and it makes me furious whats going on. All this shit with the police force's very obvious racism, and shooting unarmed black men and everything in Fergusson etc. I swing between shock and anger and cynicism and back to anger with everything I am reading.
Incidentally, I was just as furious with the Rodney King verdict when I was a teen in the UK, and I knew even less being young, middle class, white and in the UK. True, I listened to a lot of Public Enemy lol, but that was all I knew of the black experience - PE and NWA. However, any rational person of any colour could see that the Rodney King thing was fucked up, just as all the current stuff is fucked up. Then, like now, I cannot understand the on the ground realities for a black person in the USA. That does not stop me from knowing injustice and the anger that generates. I certainly don't agree with everything in the original post, and I am very aware that white people need to be very careful about what they say and do around these issues.
But on the other hand, why attack Bernie? Or this guy? Correct his wrong assumptions, sure, but why attack a supporter, even if misguided?
For the politicians, out of all the current crop of prez hopefuls (except maybe Hilary) Bernie has the longest record of fighting for justice etc. He is trying to do the right thing as far as I can see. As a politician, he needs to sort his shit out and get it right, even more than the bloke who wrote this article, but compared to Lindsay Graham or Donald Trump? Seems like the least deserving of the bunch.
I also have no problem with protesters. I am fine with them doing what ever they need to do to get the point across because otherwise nothing will get done. So they have my full support. 
But I read the original post, didn't agree with all of it but it seemed to me someone trying to do the right thing, then saw a bunch of posts berating him. I just don't see what good that does. Educate, sure Im all for that.
The message I am getting atm is "if you are white, shut up and help. But mostly, shut up" lol. Maybe that is what is wanted, in which case, message understood. It just doesn't make a great deal of sense to me.

LOL at the bolded.

I can't really speak for BLM as I am on the outside of that movement looking in like you, I'm just closer to it because I am black. But I'll try to sort this out here in the way that I understand it from reading and following folks on social media. 

Bernie may be the closest thing to an ally from your perspective, but from BLM's perspective he is another white man politician -- more of the same ol' same ol'.

I get the sense that you and others feel like because Bernie marched with MLK etc he will likely take up those issues that are important to BLM. That may be so. But MLK has been dead since April 4, 1968. He was the civil rights leader of my parents generation. I am a Gen X-er. BLM folks are mostly millennials. The issues are the same and very different across all of those constituencies -- my parents get mad about shit I don't understand but they lived and experienced Jim Crow laws. I am sure there are things that work me up that millennials care nothing about, too, but yet we are all "black." It would behoove Bernie and his fans to take that into consideration -- this is not the MLK crowd. 

I also get the sense that BLM isn't operating on no hope/wish/he prolly will type assumptions, they want Bernie et al to tell them EXPLICITLY and EXACTLY what they plan to do. Forget assuming that folks will do the right thing, no, it's too late for that shit and it hasn't worked in the past. TELL ME WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES.

They confront/protest Bernie because they can get access to him. They confronted Jeb recently, too. As others have said, the Secret Service will not let them get as close to Hillary, but I bet you she will find a way to orchestrate a situation where they protest and she can respond to them with her 10-point plan or whatever. 

Finally, it does seem very patronizing and condescending and limousine liberally of the Bernie fans to assume that because they like him and they think he has done so much in the way of civil rights, BLM should just shut up and get on board. It harkens back to the intersectional feminism threads when some of us tried to explain why we are women always but we are always BLACK women and the black part is likely going to trump the woman part every single day. 

I hope that helps toward understanding and, again, I am only speaking from an outsider perspective as I am not part of BLM. 

I dont assume anything really with Bernie. I don't think him marching with MLK is a reason for undying support either. And I totally understand the "just another white man" thing. But thats the choice - right or wrong, for the next prez. Its a bunch of old white dudes, Hills, Or Ben Carson. I am the first to say its not a great choice - I would like to see much more variety in race, gender and attitude. I would love to have an Atheist running myself, but as thats not the case, I will have to make a choice between what there is, so I will choose the least overtly religious one of them that I can.

I guess I am just practical in that I see it as a whole bunch of shitty politicians, Bernie and Hilary being the least shitty of them. So...lets attack them? That just seems...daft. Whats the end game? Destroy Bernie and get Trump into the white house? I am certainly not suggesting undying love and support for any of the candidates, I just don't see the value in going after the ones that would seem to be best for the BLM, thats all.

No one has time for "poor me Im white" - that shit is ridiculous. But some fairly ignorant white dudes will still want to help. They may be ignorant of how it feels or the reality of being black in the USA, but they know right from wrong and injustice. And if they do want to help, I don't see the value in attacking them either. 

But perhaps I am reading things wrong because I have been fairly distracted in the last few weeks due to family stuff

[eclaires]

I may be completely wrong as I am not black and not part of the BLM movement, but my perception from their protests of Bernie (and other candidates) is it is a way for them to force the white moderates (white progressives) to acknowledge what is going on in this country explicitly and actively pursue and court this specific constituency because the whole system works against black people and the idea that general liberal policy positions will serve the black and white populations equally is utterly false. The systemic racism in this country needs to first be acknowledged and accepted by white people - including white candidates who may recognize that but have not been as clear as they need to be (or they may not).

But to me it all harkens back to the MLK letter that references the white moderate being the biggest issue. We have got to to stop being defensive. We have got to accept that even if we personally aren't racist and have the best intentions, we are still the beneficiary of a system that is still keeping black people down to this day. The issues at play need their own solutions not just general liberal policy that is good for all people (in theory). It is not enough to simply not be racist - we need to be willing to accept that this country has a huge problem with systemic racism that is its own very important issue and fight to change that without making black people prove it to us or worry about our feelings on the matter.

[Deleted]

Aug 15, 2015 9:30:22 GMT -5 @koko said:

Reeve, I think the point you're missing is you are still asking black folks to work on this from a white perspective. Don't hurt their feelings, be gentle, explain...in other word, treat them with the delicacy their white fragility demands.

...

Lastly, just because Bernie and Hillary are the best of a not stellar bunch doesn't mean they should somehow be exempt from criticism. I don't understand why you think calling Bernie out on his lack of a definied racial justice position would equal Trump in the White House. Just because they're "the best" for BLM doesn't mean they're actually good.

To the first point, absolutely not. I have no interest in feeble white people being all "boo hoo" as I made clear in the other post. I am certainly not asking for people to be careful of white peoples feelings.

Having said that, perhaps the problem lies in the fact that many white people simply don't understand - more, I would say the vast majority CANT understand - because they are white. They have no frame of reference unless they have actively looked into this stuff, and even then, they can (and many do) have anger, empathy, the desire to change things, but I suspect they will never truly understand. I definitely put myself in this category.

This inevitably leads to misunderstanding. At that point, it seems we are attacking people for their ignorance, and labelling it as "poor white persons feelings". Don't get me wrong, sometimes thats exactly what it is lol, in which case, pile on, I will join you, cos fuck that shit. All I am saying is we are seeing a double whammy of "Shut up white people, because you don't understand" and anger because white people don't understand. Unfortunately, there is gonna have to be a lot of explaining, and much of it will fall on deaf ears. But thats the struggle - its uphill. And when someone is at least trying to help, I just don't see the benefit in attacking them.

As to the second point - I don't think they should be exempt from criticism at all, absolutely not. And I agree with this "Just because they're "the best" for BLM doesn't mean they're actually good." All I am saying is, thats the choice there is. Bernie is not only there for the BLM. He is not the BLMs candidate. If the BLM wants to hold his feet to the fire, I am fine with it, I just think there are better targets. And if people are waiting for the perfect BLM candidate, they can join me in the queue waiting for a very liberal, anti gun, anti war, anti corporation, atheist woman with no ties to lobbyists and a stellar record on human rights and race issues. Until then, I will go with Bernie or Hilary.

My point about the gigantic turd of a man Trump was only that the BLM have disrupted Bernie twice so far (I think), and if that pattern continues, that will hinder Bernie. And I am not sure it will do the BLM much good either - those that have been sympathetic to the BLM will inevitably start to feel resentful, because there are other people with other priorities and issues going to the events to see what Bernie has to say. As I said before, I have no problem with it, but I am not sure the outcome will be what the BLM hopes for. Damage him or Hilary enough, and let the Forrest Trump get the presidency? 

In a nutshell, I think that as Bernie is (probably) the best of the candidates as far as this stuff goes, he should be the lowest on the list of those to attack. Not free of it of course because he needs to be clear on where he stands on this stuff. Instead he seems like the first. It just seems weird and counterintuitive, to me.