| Contrary to popular opinion, communities of color have not sat about for the last few years wringing our hands wondering how we can get those white folks to pay more attention to us. Our communities are flourishing and full of intellectual diversity. Most of the more progressive/radical bloggers are blogging about grassroots social justice issues that directly affect their communities. I almost never read mainstream news sources any more - I link through my favorite bloggers of color to find out what's going on with people of color who live in Greece, Mexico, Australia and the U.S. I read comments to find out what other people of color are thinking about events. Through the "colored" blogging community, I have become more connected to other people like me than I have probably ever been in my life.
Which is not to say there are no problems. I've seen significant tensions between heterosexual bloggers of color and queers, rich or more well off bloggers and not so rich or poverty stricken bloggers, male and female bloggers, trans bloggers and cis bloggers, Latin@, Black, Asian, Arab, Indian etc bloggers. I could go on and on. Every type of fight between bloggers of color that could happen has happened, which exposes exactly how much work our communities have to do with each other.
So when we have so much work to do between ourselves and within our own communities, there better be a very good reason to attend a mostly white conference that is expensive as hell, largely has no interest in anything bloggers of color are doing outside of the conference, has gone to some lengths to even kick bloggers of color out of their community, and pretty much means almost the opposite of what bloggers of color mean when it says "create change".
But as of today, I have not read or heard a single reason for white bloggers' interest in "diversity" or "inclusion" that was not in some way connected to "We don't want to look like we're just a bunch of old white guys. It's not like that. We swear. We mean well and all want the same thing. We need to work together."
But the first thing almost every blogger of color I read (and granted, I'm in the more progressive/radical community) would say to this argument is, "We want the same thing? Who knew?"
And white folks don't limit themselves to assuming that "we all want the same thing". Some of the more popular assumptions are as follows: 1. Bloggers of color means "black".
2. Bloggers of color are poor.
3. Bloggers of color hold mostly menial labor jobs (hence the lack of time or willingness to do something "educated" like blog).
4. Bloggers of color haven't been educated at elite universities.
5. Bloggers of color don't have their own thriving communities.
6. Bloggers of color didn't create those communities as a direct result of the neglect and/or outright racism of white bloggers.
7. Bloggers of color are standing outside the Doors of the Elite and staring balefully through the windows, longing with all our hearts to be invited in.
8. Bloggers of color need white folks.
9. Bloggers of color don't have a very real existing and standing critique of white leftists and their organizing strategies.
10. Bloggers of color have not made the deliberate choice to not be involved in the organizing efforts of white led/centered groups.
What many white folks haven't figured out yet is that their very assumptions and speculations are what's wrong with "inclusivity". The assumptions and speculations white folks have about everything from what action needs to be taken, to who are the actual people they are working with, hides the reality of a particular situation to the point that white people often aren't aware that they are the only person in the room.
~~~
The failure on the part of white people to incorporate a critical analysis of "inclusivity" that draws on the historical failures of white led/centered movements, as well as the vocal and varying opinions of people of color, has real repercussions for both white folks and people of color interested in social justice.
For example Michal Osterweil asks about anti-globalization movements that fashion themselves on feminist organizing: What does it mean to see yourself as part of a movement governed by feminist and minoritarian logics when in so many of the most visible spaces, the voices and languages of women continue to be less audible? Does it matter if we have a fabulously astute and sensitive notion of what a good democratic - non-representative - politics would look like if we cannot involve more people in the conversation? Worse, is it of any use to have a great theoretical notion of the politics you want, but the very subjects you are claiming to be inspired by - that is those who have traditionally been othered, marginalised, excluded - are not present to participate in the discussion? If theoretical and reflective practice is so important to us today, even as an ethical and formal element, how do we live with such inconsistencies between our theoretical language and our experiences?
She then goes on to point out in her own media based organizing, she is the only female on the editorial board of her magazine - and despite the fact that the magazine's intention is to be feminist and inclusive of women, they have had an incredibly difficult time of collecting submissions from women. She states, "For despite our best intentions and the belief that we were not exclusive or biased, I don't think that the absence of many voices, especially those of women, is a coincidental or accidental occurrence. I believe it was influenced by dynamics that have everything to do with the mostly white, male editorial board, as well as cultural-structural factors harder to articulate. Moreover, I don't think going to press - despite these obvious lacks - was an obvious or inevitable choice. Rather it was the product of a certain rubric of value. One that placed greater value on both getting it out there, and on the time and effort we had put into publishing this journal regardless of the shortcomings, over the cost of having a journal with so many voices and perspectives missing."
In other words, her collective made the decision to go to press having been built on "inclusivity" as a theory rather than a practice. But if "inclusivity" is only important in theory when building the most important part of any organization (the base), why on earth would inclusivity naturally flow out of something where it didn't exist to begin with?
Most organizations that struggle with "inclusivity" and "diversity" follow this pattern - they believe that they must move "fast". That their work is so important and necessary, it doesn't matter if people of color or women or disabled people or non-citizens or any of the marginalized communities they claim to be wanting to help are a part of the basic fundamental decision making that is a part of organizing a grassroots movement. Much of this logic rests on the truth that we live in desperate times, and desperate things are happening as we speak. But much of this logic also rests on hierarchies of power that place the people who think "we'll worry about `inclusivity' later" at the top of the power structure.
In short, white folks make a deliberate choice to set up their base/structure without the participation of people of color - and they make that choice because they have the power to do so. And once they make the choice to set up their structure without the participation of people of color, it is white privilege (power) that allows white people to build a discourse of assumptions that write out the very existence of people of color on the net.
It is white privilege that allows white bloggers the confidence and self-assurance to assume that the reason bloggers of color did not show up to their conference is because we don't exist. It is white privilege that allows white bloggers to assume that they are our allies when they don't even know for a fact that we exist. It is white privilege that allows white bloggers to assume there must be something wrong with communities of color otherwise they would be blogging. It is white privilege that allows white bloggers to assume that they have the answers to the problem people of color supposedly present to the blogging world.
And it is white privilege that allows white bloggers to assume that bloggers of color have never asked ourselves "How does it feel to be a problem?"
When bloggers are blinded by these privileges before they begin to organize - when they continue to remain blinded by these privileges even after they have built their base and decided what's important and why they are doing what they are doing - when their very organization is built on the privileged idea that people of color (or any other marginalized group) are not important enough to be a part of the brick and mortar that builds the foundation of the organization, is it any wonder that these organizations continue to recreate racist (and homophobic, ableist, nationalist, sexist) agendas that people of color only want to be a part of on a conditional basis, if that?
Is it any wonder that we have stopped extending the `benefit of the doubt' and have gone about finding ways to build our own organizations?
~ ~ ~
But what are white bloggers to do - if they accept the basic fact that the problem of inclusivity rests on their shoulders? Are they supposed to destroy everything and start over again? Should they continue their desperate efforts to convince people to please please pretty please come? Should they continue ventures like the Chicago 17? What is to be done?
I don't believe it's necessary to tear everything down and start over again (for an amazing example of people restructuring and working with what is already there, see the Allied Media Conference). But I do believe that it's important to recognize that nothing is sacred. Not the structure of the organization, not the organizations goals, not the people who are a part of the structure - nothing can escape the challenge of introspection and deliberation. And if it doesn't pass muster, it must be dropped or changed.
What this means for white bloggers who are truly interested in working with bloggers of color in their organizing is that they will challenge the very concept of what "blogging" is. They will question: What is news? What is legitimate news? Who is the news about? What news is important? Why is it important? Who is reading their blogs? Who is commenting on them? What news is important to communities of color? Is a pretty academic essay that breaks down the Bush administration as helpful or necessary to a community whose kids are being imprisoned for protesting segregation in their schools as news about the upcoming rally is? And if it's not, why are most white bloggers who are interested in diversity blogging about the Bush administration rather than the upcoming rally?
Nothing can be safe from deep and thoughtful introspection and deliberation. Because I promise, once introspection and deliberation start happening - white bloggers will discover that they've been asking the wrong questions. It's not "Where are all the bloggers of color?" but rather instead, "What are people of color already doing?" It's not "How can we get more people of color to show up to our stuff?" but rather instead, "How can I become more integrated into the movements run by people of color?
But reaching the point where people of color share answers with white folks can only happen if white people (or whoever holds the position of power) recognize that their "base" has been constructed using the blueprints to a harmful and violent structure that has done incredible damage to communities of color.
It's not a "mistake" that white folks didn't have time or forgot to "include" people of color in everything they have done. And the first step to working together is for white folks to admit that and be accountable to the repercussions of that reality. It's a difficult thing to do, but it has happened. In the blogging world there's hundreds of examples of white bloggers who are consistently and thoughtfully anti-racist. A good place to start working is to talk to those bloggers (for a list of anti-racist bloggers see here).
White folks must recognize they've had it all wrong - they are the problem. It is they who must change, not people of color. But they must also recognize that if they are the problem, they can also be a part of the solution, if they really want to be.
And I for one, hope they want to be.
~ ~ ~
Special thanks to the following bloggers who helped me work through my ideas:
The Field Negro
Having Read The Fine Print
Zuky
The Unapologetic Mexican
Ebogjonson
Jack and Jill Politics |
