The Weapon of Memory: A Brief Reflection


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

“You say, ‘I haven’t left anything in Africa.’ …you left your mind in Africa!” — Malcolm X

With legitimized trepidation in each painful step, their soiled and bloodied feet, shackled with rusting iron at the ankle, marched from maritime prisons into a new reality — indeed a prison of sorts. This alternate reality entailed not only the enslavement of their bodies, but the degradation of their culture, erasure of their language, and evisceration of their spiritual lives. In the midst of our retentions we find our Black-selves in continual moments of spiritual reclamation. Was not our most precious loss that of our memory, or the knowing of how to remember? African somas, culture, and politics have, from the beginning, been the enclaves of white appropriation for both control and profit.

Management of black existence has always fused in compelling ways with white perceptions of black social and intellectual life. When Jim Crow minstrel performers stepped on stage, faces painted black with burnt cork, they projected an image of believable black life mainly because white-supremacist-created stereotypes, which were by definition of their construction, infused with meanings made palatable and profitable for white audiences.

But what does blackface minstrelsy look like in the twenty-first century? In times past I have argued that it looked like commercial hip hop; I still maintain this. But the current presidential election cycle has witnessed the Republican party render to Herman Cain a national rostrum wherewith to carry out blackface-like buffoonery on a national stage. Yet, concomitant with his shameful exit we also witnessed the xenophobic cultural rejection of the All-American Muslim television series. And it has become apparent that the average white Republican voter is still quite comfortable seeing People of Color subjugated and subservient to political agendas that sustain the interest of a white male ruling class elite (the 1%) — and whenever this can be facilitated by a venal figure with a black face all the better.

Revolutionary Black intellectuals like Steve Biko and Frantz Fanon have long traced the provenance and explained the prevalence of white colonial ideology presented in Black face.

“In order to assimilate and to experience the oppressor’s culture, the native has to leave certain of his intellectual possessions in pawn. These pledges include his adoption of the forms of thought of the colonialist bourgeoisie.” — Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth

Here Fanon explains that the colonialist deemed it a cultural imperative to denounce the political presence of the native whereby to secure his compliance — or for the purposes of a 2012 election, his/her vote. Because politics do not stand alone, even the native’s image must be sequestered and re-managed, such that it be not merely arrested, but pressed into the service of a ruling class colonial order.

Representation is paramount in the shaping of America’s image in both domestic and international spheres. Given America’s wretched history (and present) with regard to race and class tensions, having an African-American figurehead as the face of the American empire is quite conducive to the international resistance of American hegemony. Indeed, President Obama has been metaphorically described as the opioid of the global masses.

But moments such as this, be they the intentionalities of a corporate plutocracy or mere organic products of the democratic maneuvers of concerned citizens, do have historical precedent.

Mary L. Dudziak, in her essay, Desegregation as a Cold War Imperative, states:

In the years following World War II, racial discrimination in the United States received increasing attention from other countries. Newspapers throughout the world carried stories about discrimination against non-white visiting foreign dignitaries, as well as against American blacks. At a time when the U.S. hoped to reshape the postwar world in its own image, the international attention given to racial segregation was troublesome and embarrassing. The focus of American foreign policy at this point was to promote democracy and to ‘contain’ communism. However, the international focus on U.S. racial problems meant that the image of American democracy was tarnished.

It is a naive to imagine that judicial altruism and situational ethics were the key factors in the 1954 U.S. Supreme court decision in favor of African-American educational progress in the Brown v. Board of Education in favor of school desegregation. With the nation in a postwar global rebuilding moment, the corridors of power would heavily rely upon the moral legitimacy that would result from perceived domestic racial cohesion. Since the U.S. military had used a segregated military machine in the war theater to battle forms of fascism it was imperative that the U.S. recast its own image. With the fabrication of this new image once again the black soma became the terrain upon which eruptions of power politics manifest themselves. School segregation was completely ignored for the entirety of the nation’s history, but suddenly in the postwar year of 1954 we are led to believe that the decisive conversation on black access to the nation’s educational resources was a paramount concern. This, no doubt, served as a hollow beacon of progress to much of the rest of the world that America had somehow bettered itself.

But are we actually in a post-racial historical moment? I strongly argue the negative. This grossly premature assumption of America as a new space, sanitized of institutional racial oppression, is insidiously dangerous. Why? Because it coincides with the delusion that we no longer need to do the work of race-based equity politics. African-Americans now have their very own President, and liberal whites were hugely influential in putting him in office. Is this not the narrative? A quick glance at any local, national, or even global socioeconomic statistical indexes where People of Color exist should be sufficient to disabuse any suspecting citizen of the misconception of racial equity, political or otherwise.

With the issuing of Cain and attempted silencing of All-American Muslim, the colonizers have declared that the scaffolds of power shall remain unchanged, while also maintaining a normative, though imaginary, representative aesthetic of America as essentially white and Christian. The deployment of Cain and bigoted denouncement of All-American Muslim signals yet another eradication of the political interest of those “othered.”

From intentional black invisibility at “Slut Walks” and “Occupy” protest, to black exploitation in the film The Help; from Herman Cain’s minstrel politics, to the ethnocentric disdain for Muslim-Americans, the colonial Right continues to vividly display to the nation and world what their sinister vision of the role those they seek to subjugate should be in this society. As we step forward into the new year we must remain sober and mindful of the necessity to regain the memories of who we were before we became something — or someone’s – else.

The Passing of Robert L. Carter, and School Desegregation in the Metropolitan North


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Robert Carter

Robert CarterI was saddened to hear of the death of Judge Robert L. Carter yesterday, at the age of 94.  The passing of this great generation of civil rights reformers (Fred Shuttlesworth and Derrick Bell are gone too) was of course inevitable — Dr. King would be in his 80s, if he were still with us.  But studying their words and work, one is reminded of just how limited our visions of justice are these days.

I had the great privilege of spending a week with Carter a few years ago, as a participant in an NEH seminar on civil rights up at Harvard.  He was sharp, passionate and inspiring, as he regaled us with story after story about his legal work with Thurgood Marshall and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and walked us through his informative memoir, “A Matter of Law.”  If I remember correctly, I was a bit combative in some of our exchanges.  Carter insisted on the transformative potential of school desegregation cases in the urban North, which he constantly pushed from within the NAACP in the mid/late 60s.  I argued that the real issue was metropolitan housing segregation, and that a focus on the cities alone would achieve nothing more than tokenism, resistance, and white flight.  He countered by emphasizing, rightly, the value of setting legal precedents.  This was, after all, how the Brown decision was achieved in 1954:  a long, slow walk through the court system.  It was particularly important to get the courts to focus on impact, not intent, in the application of constitutional doctrine to segregation in the North.  Once that was achieved, things could open up in much more transformative ways.

As background for my home ownership book, I’ve been doing some research on civil rights, the law and housing policy from the mid-60s to the mid-70s, and I’m in a much better position now to make sense of what Carter was trying to tell me — and of his legacy.  During this all-too-brief period, there was a possibility (albeit a thin one) that the nation might finally confront the pattern of metropolitan inequality and segregation (by race and class) that had emerged in the wake of World War II.  Real discussions of the necessity of ‘opening up the suburbs’ were taking place, not only within the civil rights and fair housing movements, but also within the Johnson administration, the courts, and even in the early days of Nixon’s first term (George Romney, Secretary of HUD, characterized suburbia as a ‘white noose’ around the neck of urban America).  Most parties to this discussion recognized that both access to employment and to quality public education hinged on whether American metropolitan areas could be restructured.  In other words, the future of the American opportunity structure was at stake — but time was of the essence.  The nation was on the cusp of a massive expansion in suburban development (and of home ownership), but the shape which our social geography would take was still somewhat plastic.  The intellectual, judicial and policy tools were there to trace direct connections between social geography and opportunity, and to expand civil rights jurisprudence beyond the limited individualistic ontology that had previously defined it.

And Carter was right there, at the forefront.  Unfortunately for all of us, this brief window of opportunity to unwind metropolitan inequality had slammed shut by the mid-70s.  There were small victories and experiments at the local and state level, here and there; the Mount Laurel decision, by the New Jersey Supreme Court in 1975, for example.  But my argument about the ‘window’ is mostly aimed at the federal level.

Nixon gets some of the blame, as much because of his racial demagoguery as his urban and housing policies.  His Supreme Court appointments get a lot of it, too.  The San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973) and Milliken v. Bradley (1974) decisions carved a direct path to the urban school crisis we presently confront.  Despite occasional exceptions at the state level, federal courts also continued to limit the reach of constitutional claims against exclusionary zoning, rendering fair housing law a dead letter in much of the country.  Suburban white America captured the lion’s share of the responsibility, and retains it today.  While the Republican Party has become the unapologetic champion of white suburban privilege (see this recent piece by Daniel Denvir, on urban issues in today’s GOP), the Democrats refuse to see what even George Romney (let alone Robert L. Carter) saw 40 years ago:  that racial and class segregation is a recipe for disaster for the country.

Thanks, Mr. Carter, and rest in peace.  That window is still closed, sadly.  But it is surely cracked.  And that, as Leonard Cohen once wrote, is how the light gets in.

Originally posted on Chants Democratic.

Hegemony of Narrative: “The Help” as Freedom Myth

“Naiveté is often an excuse for those who exercise power. For those upon whom that power is exercised, naiveté is always a mistake.”

~Michel-Rolph Trouillot
“Ideology is a representation of the imaginary relationship of individuals to their real conditions of existence.”

~ Althusser

What is required for an empire to maintain the subjugation, if not the compliance, of its darker subjects? The Imperials must manage their subject’s collective memories about, not only who they were, but who and where they politically are. Hegemony of narrative of both the subject and subjugator is an indispensable tool in the hands of the colonizer.

With the release of the film “The Help” came the usual adoration associated with cinemagraphic attempts at complicated feel-good stories about race relations. All the usual suspects were presented: the white liberal heroine-protagonist (Skeeter), the Black role players (Aibileen and Minny) and depictions of personal prejudice rather than institutional white supremacy as merely a social inconvenience. Like “Precious” and “Crash”, “The Help” has become a race film of sorts in the modern era; not an all Black cast, but, indeed myths which shape popular perceptions about Black life.

The cultural danger in this film (and others like it) is that, via cinemagraphic nostalgia, they so often succeed at (re)inscribing ahistorical notions about racial inequality that, at best appear to be matters of mere social misfortune often at the hands single individuals, or “persons unknown”, and at worst completely obscure the visceral thrust of triune forces which bell hooks calls “white supremacist capitalist patriarchy”. The result of this? We enjoy a film’s romanticized representations of bad days gone by while being anesthetized into indifference toward the economic and social plight of our modern day “Help”.

Lest my disapproving criticism of the film stand alone, I join it with the chorus of other thinkers on these matters. Nelson George, filmmaker and author, wrote in the New York Times:

A larger problem for anyone interested in the true social drama of the era is that the film’s candy-coated cinematography and anachronistic super-skinny Southern belles are part of a strategy that buffers viewers from the era’s violence. The maids who tell Skeeter their stories speak of the risks they are taking, but the sense of physical danger that hovered over the civil rights movement is mostly absent. Medgar Evers is murdered in Jackson during the course of the story, but it is more a TV event, very much like the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, than a felt tragedy.

Or professor Rebecca Wanzo:

One of the three narrators, Aib[i]leen, says that she realizes she is more free than the racist character that destroys her livelihood, a claim that encourages readers to feel better about segregation because, in this logic, nobody can take real, psychological freedom from anyone. Freedom is really about how you feel, not about, you know, the law.

Yet, a more thorough critique is rendered in an open statement from the Association of Black Women Historians (ABWH). They speak to a problematic socio-aesthetic binary which emerges in the feature adaptation, and is patriarchal both in its asexual Mammy-gendering of Black women and its stereotypical portrayals of Black men and community.

“The Help’s representation of these women is a disappointing resurrection of Mammy—a mythical stereotype of black women who were compelled, either by slavery or segregation, to serve white families. Portrayed as asexual, loyal, and contented caretakers of whites, the caricature of Mammy allowed mainstream America to ignore the systemic racism that bound black women to back-breaking, low paying jobs where employers routinely exploited them. The popularity of this most recent iteration is troubling because it reveals a contemporary nostalgia for the days when a black woman could only hope to clean the White House rather than reside in it.”

And,

“We do not recognize the black community described in The Help where most of the black male characters are depicted as drunkards, abusive, or absent. Such distorted images are misleading and do not represent the historical realities of black masculinity and manhood.”

The film’s distortion of narrative, on its own, could stand as an eruption on the terrain of sound historiography on the period. But this tragedy, as suggested by the ABWH, is deepened by class cues which sketch “the most dangerous racists in 1960s Mississippi as a group of attractive, well dressed, society women, while ignoring the reign of terror perpetuated by the Ku Klux Klan and the White Citizens Council, limits racial injustice to individual acts of meanness.”

In 1935 a crucial piece of worker legislation, the National Labor Relations Act, was passed. Known as the “Wagner Act” after New York Sen. Robert Wagner, who in sponsoring the bill, reasoned that “Men versed in the tenets of freedom become restive when not allowed to be free.” The National Labor Relations Act constituted a seminal democratic moment in American labor and union organizing. Wagner’s bill, among other things, guaranteed protections for union organizing independent of company domination, the right to strike, boycott, and demonstrate against recalcitrant employers, and banned firing as a coercive tool to control union ranks.

The constellation of its lofty achievements notwithstanding, where the Wagner Act failed in its attempts to enhance the democratization of American labor was in its shameful exclusion of Domestic Workers. Southern senators, in an effort to safeguard their own economic greed, saw to it that no domestic worker could ever unionize under the legal indemnity of the Act. Political cooperation was contingent upon the prohibition of the domestic labor force, of which 90 percent were Black women in the South. Hegemony of dominant narratives create sinister silences around this issue via its omission. That domestic workers were left outside of the protective legal umbrella of the Wagner Act often goes under/unmentioned even in college lectures and text.

Possibilities of protecting the collective interest of our modern day “help” must be central in the overall struggle for workers rights, understanding that domestic labor, unlike other labor, is isolated work. At this writing only one state, New York, has passed a Domestic Workers Bill of Rights. California’s state government is under increasing pressure from organized domestic laborers and their allies to follow suit. In the context of the film’s ahistorical misrepresentation of the politics of Black women’s domestic labor there are existing ways to support private home worker’s economic rights. By organizing you can press your state legislature to pass a Domestic Workers Bill of Rights law.

Links to organizing:

domesticworkers.org/ny-bill-of-rightsdomesticworkers.org/members#rifuerza-laboral.org/caringacrossgenerations.org/

Achievement First Secret #4 – Nothing Says 21st Century Education Like Segregation

Do charter schools have to teach all kids in the community equally? As they find them, as they are?  This blog post from Wait, What in Connecticut, looking at the enrollment data of several charter schools, including Achievement First schools, argues no.

Perhaps most disturbing of all is the fact that despite Connecticut’s urban areas having significant numbers of students coming from non-English speaking homes, charter schools have somehow managed to create learning environments in which virtually NONE OF THE STUDENTS who come from non-English speaking households end up in their schools.

As educators and policy makers know, one of the most significant challenges to educational achievement is language barriers particularly a problem when students take their homework (which is written in English) home to non-English speaking households.  Greater parental engagement in their children’s education is hard enough, but when the students are learning in a language that is not spoken at home it makes it virtually impossible to generate significant parental involvement.

In Bridgeport 40% of the students go home to a non-English speaking home.  That percentage increases to 44.7% in Hartford and in New Haven the percent of students coming from non-English speaking homes is 28.6%

In Connecticut, charter schools are required to ensure equal access to their schools.  Efforts must be made to recruit students from all racial and ethnic backgrounds and admission tests can’t be used.  In fact, entrance decisions must include a blind lottery system.  So that said, compare the percentage of students from non-English speaking homes with the numbers the charter school have reported to the State Department of Education:

School     (% students from non-English speaking homes)
Bridgeport Public Schools     (40%)
Achievement First – Bridgeport Academy (0.6%)
The Bridge Academy (14.9%)
New Beginnings     (0%)
Park City Prep     (0%)
HartfordPublic Schools     (44.7% )
Achievement First – Hartford (0%)
Jumoke     (0%)
New HavenPublic Schools     (28.6%)
Achievement First – Amistad     (0%)
Achievement First – Elm City Prep     (0%)
Common Ground School     (4.6%)
Highville Charter     (0%)

The data is certainly unsettling.  If Connecticut’s publically funded charter schools are supposed to be equally accessible to all and up to 4 in 10 students from those areas come from non-English speaking households then it is pretty unbelievable and completely unconscionable that almost no charter school students come from non-English speaking households.This follows along the lines of scholarly reports that have looked at whether charter schools are recreating the conditions of segregation.  As the LA Times reported:

The trend toward segregation was especially notable for African American students. Nationally, 70% of black charter students attend schools where at least 90% of students are minorities. That’s double the figure for traditional public schools. The typical black charter-school student attends a campus where nearly three in four students also are black, researchers with the Civil Rights Project at UCLA said Thursday.

The other researchers also focused on economic segregation, looking at private companies that manage schools, in most cases charters. The enrollments at most of these campuses exacerbated income extremes, they concluded. Charters tended to serve higher-income students or lower-income students. Charters also were likely to serve fewer disabled students and fewer English learners.Because nothing says Progressive like Segregationist policies!

New National Report Highlights RI Public Defender

Back in February I posted about the fact that underfunded Public Defenders are a smokescreen for the real issue: underfunded prosecutors and courts cannot handle the number of crimes coming at them.  A new report by Justice Policy Institute, System Overload: The Costs of Under-Resourcing Public Defense, continues the one-sided argument- although making some excellent points.

The latest report (continuing the BJS findings, as did I) notes the costs to “people” and “taxpayers” through pre-trial detention, and how hasty defense increases wrongful convictions.  Yet it does not point out who benefits.  Any analysis should be a “Cost-Benefit Analysis,” and factor into account those beneficiaries who care neither about people nor taxpayers.  They care about their own bottom line, and their own power.

Those who enjoy and utilize statistics will find a wealth in the new JPI report, such as: 64% of wrongful rape convictions, exonerated from DNA evidence, are Black, although only 12% of America is Black.  I love numbers, but a popular Movement will not be based on numbers.  Simple facts, simple understandings, and a simple view of what the criminal justice system is actually doing will cause the creature to crumble.

Rhode Island and others (including Bronx Defenders and in D.C.) are lauded for taking the entire person into account, including pre-trial and post-release issues that arise from criminal justice contact.

Other than the obvious recommendation, to implement standards of representation as outlined by the American Bar Association, the report recommends two other vital pieces:

  1. Public Defenders should engage in the policy debate.  It is shameful that in a country where so many vital services are conducted through the state, those workers are generally forbidden to speak up or are living in fear for their jobs.  This is a waste of insight and experience, provided they are capable of speaking openly.
  2. Seek input from those who have been served by the Public Defender.  To move our society in any productive way on criminal justice, the “Client” relationship must be seen as a “partnership.”  Are we all in this together?  Or are the poor communities being controlled by an upper-class colonial mentality?  I have gotten more requests from my internet provider to see how they are doing than I have had from anyone in the criminal justice sphere over the past two decades.

This report still fails to pay even a passing reference to the problem of underfunded prosecutors.  I don’t believe it is intentional, it is the product of an arms race.  Funding must keep up with the other side, rather than funding must be reduced to the other side.  In a down economy, nobody will accept sweeping increases for prosecutions… but nor will we see any massive increases to Public Defense.

By making the issue about public defense, one can argue about “coddling criminals” or “can we really afford this?”  But if the argument were about whether the Attorney General and Courts should be 50% of the budget… what then?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387