Issues/Analysis
RACISM AND WAR ANALYSIS, developed by DPP’s Multicultural Competence Committee, for our 11/19/2007 event, “Racism/War: Making Connections for Peace”
My name is Becky Pierce and I’m a member of Dorchester People for Peace. I’m going to talk for a few minutes on connections between racism and war, and on why we all need to work toward Dr. Martin Luther King’s vision of a multiracial movement for peace and justice, if we really want to stop our government’s wars, both in Iraq and in our neighborhoods.
It’s probably best to start our discussion with a common understanding of what we mean by “racism.” In this discussion, we’re talking about structural racism, rather than individual acts of prejudice. By structural racism, we mean the interlocking institutional policies and procedures that historically have been made by white people for the benefit of white people, at the expense of people of color. White people are often blind to these built-in structures that privilege us, whereas these inequalities are much more obvious to people of color, who have to live with them every day. Some examples are
---bank, real estate company, and government policies that have helped white people for decades to build and pass on wealth through home ownership, and most recently the subprime mortgage scams that are depriving many low-income families, disproportionately families of color, of their wealth and their homes.
---a military recruiting system that tells recruiters to target low income youth and youth of color
---a criminal justice system that lets employers use CORI criminal records checks discriminatorily against people of color (I have a CORI too but mine has never been used against me.)
---high levels of street violence in communities of color, after huge cuts in funding for youth programs, jobs, and schools
---high levels of incarceration for youth of color, who are 4 times more likely to be imprisoned than white youth, with one in 3 black males in prison at some time in their lives, and discriminatory arrests and sentencing for drug offenses, and in the Jena 6 case in Louisiana.
---hurricane Katrina deaths and lack of aid to survivors, mostly poor and black, because of governments’ deliberate failure to maintain the levees or to evacuate and rescue people from the flooding.
---locating a dangerous bioweapons research laboratory in a Boston neighborhood where thousands of low-income people of color live.
---spending billions on the Iraq war to make oil and weapons companies richer, while cutting funding for social programs that low income people, disproportionately people of color, depend on for their survival.
These are all examples of the racism built into our social and economic system, and maintained by government policies.
And who is controlling this government and these policies? The wealthiest 1% of the US population, overwhelmingly white and male, owns one third of the country’s personal and corporate wealth, and has tremendous power over who gets elected and who the government serves. The other 99% of us, including upper middle class whites and low income blacks and everybody in between, are all hurt by war spending, tax cuts to the rich, and the government’s refusal to fund urgent national needs, such as
---repairs to crumbling roads, bridges, public transportation, levees
---effective action to stop global warming
---universal healthcare
---affordable housing
---pensions and old-age security.
---quality public education at all levels
And add to this the increased risk that US wars and foreign policy put us all at, and using the so-called war on terrorism as an excuse to take away many of our civil liberties and constitutional rights .
You would think that 99% of the people would have the power to change things, but that’s where racism comes in. Throughout US history our government has used racism and fear to divide us, to control us, to make us accept intolerable policies, conditions, and injustices.
This system has always needed a class of disposable people, a permanent underclass whose rights, needs, and lives don’t have to be respected. These people can be recruited to fight in wars, employed at low-wage jobs without benefits, laid off to increase corporate profits, and denied their basic human rights to education, housing, food, healthcare, and help in an emergency such as Katrina. These people are often denied their right to return to a supportive community after military service, incarceration, or hurricane Katrina. The system uses racism to get away with treating people of color as disposable.
The Bush-Cheney administration has deliberately used anti-Arab and anti-Muslim racism and fear-mongering to justify the Iraq war and to justify a future attack on Iran. They promote an us-versus-them mentality, with heavy racist overtones, which reinforces racial divisions and hostility at home as well.
And the government/corporate system also needs a constant state of war, and now has it in its “war on terrorism.” A constant state of war is being used to scare people into accepting less democracy, more racism, more economic hardship, more cuts in crucial social programs, attacks on other countries, acting as if our country ownsother countries’ oil, spying on US citizens, and imprisoning people without charges and with no regard for their rights.
So what is needed in order to confront this racist, war-mongering power structure that has so successfully kept us from uniting to challenge it? White activists need to join with activists of color in working on issues identified by communities of color as crucial to their survival. White people need to recognize that these issues are our issues as well, because we’re part of the 99% being hurt by the wealthy elite that controls our country, so we are acting in our own self-interest when we unite with people of color to fight the system. We may not have recognized this because we’ve been brought up as part of the dominant culture with its assumption of white superiority, which has been deliberately promoted in this country since the days of slavery.
The movement that people of all backgrounds need to build together to stop war and racism needs to be led by people of color, which means we white people need to listen to activists of color and be willing to follow their leadership. People of color have intimate experience of racist/militarist oppression by the system, so people of color know best what the issues are and how to solve them. As Paul Ortiz said in the Jena 6 article you found on your chair, “the best case study that we have for broad-based social change is still by far the black-led civil rights movement.”*
I believe there’s no anti-war strategy that white peace activists could choose that would be more powerful than joining in a movement led by people of color. As Tim Wise, a white antiracist activist, pointed out a few years ago, after analyzing election results by race, if the white progressive minority in this country joined the overwhelming majority of people of color opposed to war and racism, the result would be a winning majority. This would really give the 1% ruling elite something to worry about, and would give us all a chance to build the powerful multiracial movement that Dr. King envisioned.
* “The Jena Six and US History.” By Paul Ortiz, http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/092707P.shtml
http://www.dotpeace.org/files/RacismandWarfor11-19-07.doc
* * * *
DPP, IRAQ and The Anti-War Moment
Discussion Paper for Sept 10 07 DPP Meeting draft 1, 9/2/07 By Mike Prokosch [See comments by DPP member Denise Zwahlen, following] a. What’s going on with Iraq The main dynamic in Iraq right now is not religious warfare. It’s power struggles to control territory and oil. These can be Sunni vs Shi’a, or Shi’a vs Shi’a, but the main question is, do you have a mass base, political influence, and weapons. If you do, you try to consolidate base areas, villages or neighborhoods where your warlords control population. You use religious cleansing to force out other sects and dominate those who remain. You use religion because it’s a way to mobilize people to fight for your group. It’s a lot like the Balkan war: they used ethnic differences but it was really for political control. Groups with a mainly religious appeal like Al Qaeda are small. The power struggle is being carried on in the streets. It’s being carried on in the government because if you control the police you can use them to kill your opponents, if you control the Housing Ministry you can get housing for your base, and you can shut out competing groups from getting those things. It’s being carried out outside the country, lining up foreign sponsors who will get you money and arms. One of those foreign sponsors is the US. The power struggle has paralyzed the government. Instead of trying to administer ministries or deliver services, politicians and ministry employees are spending all their time trying to get stuff for their group, shut out other groups, and in their free time line their own pockets. These preoccupations have left more than half of Iraqis unemployed and many without enough water or electricity. b. What’s going on with the war & troops The surge has had limited successes, for example getting village sheiks to oppose Al Qaeda (which is primarily a non-military strategy). Overall, though, the power struggles taking place in every Iraqi institution are creating so much instability that no steady progress is possible. (Progress depends on building institutions that can guarantee personal security for Iraqis, basic services like water and electricity, and jobs.) US troops can’t build those institutions. The most they can do is provide security so that Iraqi politicians can build a viable state, which they aren’t; first Iraqis need to sort out who has power. The Bush Administration can’t do more. It’s extended the occupation to the limits of its power. It has thrown in practically all the troops and money it can get. The 15-month “stretch tours” will start ending August 08 and troop numbers have to decline then, says the #2 US commander in Iraq. There’ll be a drawdown whether Bush wants one or not. c. What’s going on in the US and DC Half to three-quarters of people in the US think we should get out soon and Congress should only fund withdrawal. War is the #1 issue in, for example, the Mass. Fifth District race. Congress is on the hot seat. But US economic and policy elites want to keep control over the Middle East, partly for the oil which our economy runs on, partly to keep other countries from controlling the oil and thus world power, and partly to control a region of emerging power. So a political consensus is emerging in Washington: the US will cut troop levels in Iraq but not fully withdraw. The US will keep a military, political, and economic presence in Iraq indefinitely. This consensus isn’t solid yet. Lesser presidential candidates are trying to break into the top tier by saying “out now.” A minority in Congress will vote to stop funding (70 signed letter out of 435). But most still support some kind of occupation. The argument is, what kind. Bush: gradual reductions starting in ‘08 Republicans: cut to 130,000 (pre-surge level) or lower, in order to head off… Democratic leadership: withdraw all combat troops starting in early ‘08 Here are some presidential candidates’ positions on the war, from http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/issues/iraq/index.html: Clinton, Obama, Dodd, Biden: phased redeployment Edwards: withdrawal within 18 months, no combat troops, troops in region to keep order Richardson: withdraw by end of 07 Gravel, Kucinich, Paul (R): out now Guiliani, McCain, Romney: maintain troop levels Huckabee, Hunter: gradually cede responsibility to Iraqis d. What should we do? There are two big ideas in the antiwar movement. One: use the 2008 elections to push candidates. Two: show mass power and try to mobilize the antiwar majority in the US. If DPP wanted to work on idea #1 we could volunteer for the presidential primary in New Hampshire or work on the Senate races in New Hampshire and Maine. Meanwhile we could pressure our own Reps and Senators to do more, if we think that’s viable. If we wanted to work on idea #2 we could help plan and mobilize for the New England regional peace demo on October 27 (for example, trying to make it have more impact in Boston and on our Reps and Senators); we could develop a consistent plan of action for the monthly Iraq Moratorium; we could table, hold banners, public meetings where we try to get more people. Neither idea much uses the strengths we’ve developed over our group’s life: counter-recruitment and relations with community organizations. Do they relate to either of these strategies? Do they lead to a whole different strategy? * * * * Response: Denise Zwahlen Just a few comments/reactions to your write-up Mike. Of course, I will not be there for the activities, whatever they may be, in September and October. I cannot see us spending much energy on Plan #1. I think Plan #2 makes much more sense. How about talking to folks in the groups in the community we have worked the closest with, present them with the strategy proposed by the Iraq Moratorium/Declaration of Peace and ask them how it could be implemented in Dorchester. Ask them if they are interested to work with us on that. I like the idea of black arm bands, of Non-Violent actions, possibly approaching some of the mosques and churches we have contact with to hold services. Holiday Party. I would like to suggest that we honor among others the local chapter of Iraq Veterans Against the War or its founder, Liam Madden. IVAW has now as one of his focus organizing inside the military and also Military Recruitment (Truth in Recruiting campaign). Several of their members, by their activism, are putting at risk their honorable discharges and the benefits that go with it. They need our supports. Making them our guests of honor for the Holiday Party could really give them a boost, give them visibility in Dorchester, help them raise money. Liam Madden did a terrific job facilitating a discussion with youth of BOLD after a showing of the Ground Truth. His analysis of the war goes well beyond Iraq. They are also looking for folks to organize house parties to raise money and introduce the community to their campaigns and get them involved. I will have one November 30th at my place in JP. The other group I would recommend we honor at our party is Boston Workers Alliance for their work on CORI reform and specifically the work they did in organizing the March, Rally and lobbying at the State House in April. Regarding plans for future educational events sponsored by DPP, I still would like to suggest that we organize a forum on the health consequences of war and violence. We could have a series of evenings planned on different aspects of the topic since there is too much to cover for one time. I think it is more likely to attract local people then a day forum on the week-end. One idea is to hold it at the Carney Hospital (it was a suggestion made by Dr. Pastore, who is the Director of the local chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility and is on staff at St Elizabeth). I would suggest we form a committee and start working on planning late this fall for March or April. When I talk committee, I am not only thinking DPP members and folks from other groups (IVAW can help us with that, Abe in particular who works with Homeless veterans and others). But if people think it would not make sense for us to organize this or nobody is interested or has the time to help put something together, then we should not do it. Just what comes to mind now Denise
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| RacismandWarfor11-19-07.doc | 33 KB |