• Opening
  • Me?!
  • Writing
  • Analysis
  • Teaching
    • Police Violence videos
    • S videos
  • Media
  • Scholarism
  • Audio/Video
  • Podcasts
  • Students?!
  • Archiving
  • Art
  • Analog (the anti-blog)
  • Other Blog Entries
  • Webpages
  • American Academy of Arts and Sciences Event
  • Online Appendix for Oped
[Christian Davenport]

One day Congressman John Lewis Came to my Job

7/23/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
Picture
For three fantastic years I ran a project with Michelle Bellino as Co-Director and Ashley Bates as basically everything called the Conflict and Peace Initiative under the International Institute at the University of Michigan.  We had a broad commitment to creating cathartic events which provoked individuals to think about political conflict as well as peace.  We also had a broad commitment to working with a large number of individuals to get as many eyes, ears and hands on something as possible.  

​In this context, we focused in on trying to get Congressman John Lewis to come to the University of Michigan to discuss his graphic novel March.  In many respects, this was a great fit for our triad of attention to graphic novels (adding to Art Spiegelman's Maus and Joe Sacco's Palestine who were each brought in separate events).  It was something that touched upon conflict as it depicted not only the anti-black discrimination and repression of the period but also the immense effort of the civil rights movement taken against these activities/institutions.  

The task was not easy.  We needed some money for he and his team were not going to be free.  We thus reached out and worked with the King-Chavez-Parks Visiting Professors Program as part of the regular Penny Stamps Distinguished Speaker Series. Additional support is provided by the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts; Department of Psychology; Department of Political Science; Institute for the Humanities; National Center for Institutional Diversity; Office of Community-Engaged Academic Learning; Rackham Graduate School; and Office of Research.  

We also wanted to push past the usual dynamic of just having someone come in to give a talk and then leave.  We wanted the keynote to simply be part of a larger wave of attention/awareness/activity/thought - this we called "Marching Forward".  Toward this end, Michelle worked on putting together a teaching/reading guide so that people could think about how to teach about the topic.  Book clubs started to be created by diverse institutions/individuals in order to prepare them for what was coming.  We put together a research and scholarship symposium in order to take advantage of all the local expertise that existed on repression and resistance.  Someone even facilitated a comic contest so that the local community could show what they could do.  The flyer itself was a work of art.

The events involved were incredible.  Once the momentum was started, the whole community got involved:

“Get in the Way” Free Public Screening (5:10pm, Thursday, September 21, 2017): In place of the previously scheduled talk by Congressman John Lewis, Andrew Aydin and Nate Powell, the Penny Stamps School of Art & Design will present a free screening of the PBS Documentary “Get in the Way” at the Michigan Theater. This 2017 film chronicles the journey of civil rights hero, congressman, and human rights champion John Lewis.

Non-Violent Action Workshop (10am-5pm, September 24, 2017): Learn about national and international examples of nonviolent movements; key research about the effectiveness and outcomes of nonviolent movements; strategies and tactics; and different roles and leadership within nonviolent movements. Free and open to all U-M undergraduate and graduate students, faculty, and staff.  Lunch and snacks will be provided.

“Over/come(ing)” Art Series Opening with Juliet Seignious (October 6, 2017): Please join the Office of Community-Engaged Academic Learning (CEAL) on Friday, October 6, 4:30-6pm for an art exhibition inspired by the graphic novel series March. Juliet’s stunning art evoke the connections between past and current social justice and civil rights protests. Please RSVP to talsabah@umich.edu.
Picture
Horizons of the Racial Justice Movement (4-7pm, November 1, 2017): This event will bring together multiple generations of black activists who attended the University of Michigan and fought for racial justice from 1970 to present. (1014 Tisch Hall, Ann Arbor, MI).

Center for the Education of Women Spectrum of Advocacy and Activism Symposium (8:30am- 7:30pm, November 15, 2017): This event will demonstrate how a person’s activism can change over time, how advocacy is tied to a person’s context and situational power, and how partnering with diverse perspectives can strengthen advocacy and activism efforts. Health outcomes has been selected as the theme for this year’s symposium. Events will be held in the Michigan League and Rackham Auditorium. See the CEW website for details.

Blood at the Root (7:30pm, Thursday, November 16, 2017): This play, performed at the School of Music, Theater and Dance, is based on the true case of the Jena Six in 2006. It explores the nature of racial bias and whether justice is truly blind. (Arthur Miller Theater, 1226 Murfin Ave, Ann Arbor, MI 48109)

“I Am Not Your Negro” Screening (November 21, 2017): Join the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice (ICPJ) at 7pm on Nov. 21 at Ann Arbor Friends Meeting House (1420 Hill Street) for a free and public screening and discussion of this powerful documentary film. Filmmaker Raoul Peck imagines the book that James Baldwin never finshed about his three assassinated friends, Medgar Evers, Malcolm X, and Martin Luther King. Baldwin’s deeply personal notes for the project have never been published before.

Comics as a Social Justice Medium (1-2:30pm, November 27, 2017): Nate Powell, the graphic artist behind March will give a presentation followed by a 30 minute Q&A. (Ann Arbor District Library, 343 South 5th Ave., Ann Arbor)

This outpouring was in part a testament to the pull of Congressman Lewis and the power of his graphic novel in captivating/educating but it was also a testament to the various members of the community who stepped up and in.  The event took a village to create it for the village to experience it and perhaps beyond this specific one to yours.  This was event precisely the kind of energy that was needed then but it was also the kind of energy that we need now.

By the time of the event (provided in the link below) people were so jazzed that extra venues needed to be identified so that it could be shown remotely.  ​
I write about this now because the passing of Congressman Lewis made me reflect on his life as well as the fact that I was honored to get a chance to meet him.  I also write about this because it revealed to me an example of what kinds of events we might need to put together moving forward as we address the problems that ail us.  Everyone has a story to tell and as we think about compiling these stories/experiences/data we should be as open to format as possible and then put all the material together so that this can be sorted as well as evaluated later. 
0 Comments

Compassion Fatigue or Fundamental Change

7/17/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
We are at a crossroads in the United States and I wonder which way we will go.  

On the one hand, we have something that is referred to as "compassion fatigue".  At its essence, this concerns

emotional and physical exhaustion leading to a diminished ability to empathize or feel compassion for others, often described as the negative cost of caring. It is sometimes referred to as secondary traumatic stress (STS). According to the Professional Quality of Life Scale, burnout and secondary traumatic stress are two interwoven elements of compassion fatigue.

In some work this is found when the problem is too large and the answers too difficult.  If one cannot figure out what to do, the mind and body simply shuts down and it/they move on to another topic. 

On the other hand, we have the possibility of trying to institute real change regarding police violence, racial inequality and bringing forward a true/robust democracy.  Clearly these issues are not easy to begin nor to sustain but there has been a deep as well as wide movement of people as well as a variety of institutions brought forward to deal with the issues at hand.  

While we think about what should be done with the current window of opportunity that we have, I think it is worthwhile to reflect on what probably should not be redone.  In particular, I am reminded of the Presidential Initiative on Race put forward under Clinton. In many respects, the initiative seemed to be excellent - there was a wide number of knowledgeable people connected with it and they had the idea of reaching out into the communities of America to hear and compile the stories about race/racism.  Unfortunately, the effort was not prepared for the groundswell of experience and emotion that was unearthed.  I attended the event in Denver but I also read the transcripts from several other cities (I cannot seem to find them now and I think that is unfortunate).  Listening, things proceeded more or less reasonably at each event until the panelists opened the mic.  This is kind of when everything went sour.  The initiative never allocated enough time for this component of the event and people appeared to get frustrated by the lack of time and seemingly the lack of interest in hearing what they had to say.  There was no depository for those that could not make the event or for cities that were not visited.  There was an opportunity but it was not used properly.  

We cannot proceed in this manner again.  We need to be prepared to hear as well as to listen.  We need to provide a million ways for people to provide what they have to offer and then we need to spend the time going through this material to figure out what was experienced, perceived and lived or survived.  Only then will we know what has transpired here in the United States.  Only then can we begin to heal and move toward a more positive peace.  

And thus we soon will have to choose: compassion fatigue or fundamental change.  
0 Comments

SO, the Black Nationalists were right.  Let's give it up people.

7/4/2020

2 Comments

 
Picture
The last few weeks of protest and revelations have been truly amazing.  First, there were mass protests about anti-black police violence.  Then there were calls to defund or, alternatively, abolish the police.  Then there was some acknowledgement of the need for people to buy black.  Now, there is some discussion about African Americans feeling the need to own guns in order to be safe.  This sounds familiar to those aware of American history in general and African American history in particular and it should.  Much of this was said by black nationalists most clearly and loudly in the mid to late 1960s and 1970s (e.g., the Black Panther Party, Republic of New Africa, the Congress of African People, the All African People's Revolutionary Party) but even before this time with the NAACP under Robert F. Williams and the Deacons for Defense and Justice as well as many of the organizations traditionally associated with the civil rights movement.  

These organizations identified that the police were engaging in significant levels of violence within and against the black community.  Some of them noted that there was no hope of reforming or negotiating with these institutions and moved that they should be eliminated.  

These organizations identified that the problems of African Americans were so far reaching, so devastating and that they were so far behind that they needed to be provided reparations in order to try to survive in the current context - for example, there is the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America which emerges from the same people associated with the Republic of New Africa.  Some of the individuals associated with these movements were quite detailed in their historical evaluations to see what happened and why regarding extending assistance to African Americans.

These organizations noted that black communities were largely being bled dry of resources with residents spending their hard earned money elsewhere.  This had numerous impacts but most importantly it reduced the overall power of this community by dissipating its potential impact.  

These organizations also identified that the problems of African Americans regarding the police and/or white vigilantism required that blacks purchase as well as learn to legally use firearms in case they had to defend themselves.  Indeed, they were well aware of the principles of "state failure" where the existing political authorities not only might not protect them but they might be directly in league with the very forces that were threatening black life.  
Picture
In short, black nationalists correctly saw the problems that confronted African Americans and they (AGAIN) correctly identified that the actions proposed (e.g., getting specific politicians voted in and crafting specific laws) would not have the desired impact on the relevant actions.  And thus we come to 2020 where the black nationalists appear to have been on to something and America is now considering selected parts of the platforms that they raised before the nation 50 or so years ago - largely without popular recognition.  To their credit, some of the members of BLM+ movements (i.e., the broad constellation of organizations and individuals that are currently emerging) do recognize some of this important history but this is largely lost on the larger population.  

I want to give recognition to these individuals and institutions here not only because they appeared to be accurate in their evaluations of the problems that continue to plague the United States as well as potential solutions for addressing some of these problems but also to note that police abolition, reparations, buying black and African American self-defense were not the only items on their platform.  Several of the topics they raised have not gotten any traction in the current environment and it is worth noting them.

For example, some of these organizations talked about not just buying black but African Americans controlling the black economy.  "Black economy"?  Yes, indeed. Those familiar with the black nationalists are familiar with the phrase "black dollars" but for those unaware:

In a recent report by Nielsen titled, “Black Dollars Matter: The Sales Impact of Black Consumers,” the message was once again highlighted: While African Americans make up just 14 percent of the population, they are responsible for some $1.2 trillion in purchases annually.

Yes, 1.2 trillion.  Well, why have these black dollars not turned into political influence?  Why would the holders of such wealth continue to be harassed and killed in the street?  Well, the black nationalists would tell us that purchasing power is not wealth and wealth is more important for how you are treated than anything else - influencing where you live, what kind of resources you have access to (short and long term) and how relevant police power would be to your life.  In addition to this, black nationalists would tell us that it is partly because African Americans might be unaware of their collective purchasing power enamored as they are with the American principles of individuality and trying to be Americans.  

As a response to this latter problem, black nationalists advocated that blacks needed to develop a keen sense of themselves as a people/group.  Strongly mirroring current BLM calls for joy and self acceptance but devoid of the references to Egypt and Africa, they advocated that blacks take pride in themselves and the achievements of their ancestors.  Clearly this was also connected to the earlier efforts of W.E.B. Dubois, Marcus Garvey and J.A. Rogers. This seems very different from the current conversations which seem more like "everybody needs a little light under the sun" approach.  

Related, one of the biggest differences concerns the ideas of self-determination.  What is Self-determination?  From the Under-represented Nations and Peoples Organization

Essentially, the right to self-determination is the right of a people to determine its own destiny. In particular, the principle allows a people to choose its own political status and to determine its own form of economic, cultural and social development. Exercise of this right can result in a variety of different outcomes ranging from political independence through to full integration within a state. The importance lies in the right of choice, so that the outcome of a people's choice should not affect the existence of the right to make a choice. In practice, however, the possible outcome of an exercise of self-determination will often determine the attitude of governments towards the actual claim by a people or nation. Thus, while claims to cultural autonomy may be more readily recognized by states, claims to independence are more likely to be rejected by them. Nevertheless, the right to self-determination is recognized in international law as a right of process (not of outcome) belonging to peoples and not to states or governments.

The preferred outcome of an exercise of the right to self-determination varies greatly among the members of UNPO. For some of our members, such as Acheh, Tibet, Barotseland and Kabylia, the only acceptable outcome is full political independence. This is particularly true of occupied or colonized nations. For others, such as our members from West Balochistan, the goal is a degree of political, cultural and economic autonomy, sometimes in the form of a federal relationship. For others yet, the right to live on and manage a people's traditional lands free of external interference and incursion is the essential aim of a struggle for self-determination. Other members, such as Taiwan and Somaliland, have already achieved a high-level or full self-determination, but are yet to be recognized as independent states by the international community.

As we are trying to figure out exactly what BLM+ is articulating, it is Black nationalists spoke of themselves as a clearly defined group - a group deserving of rights and specific treatment (even if within an established nation state).  BLM+ seems to hint at black groupness and shared experience but not to invoke the legal implications of this identity discussed within international law. They speak about the problems of global capitalism but much of what they discuss in terms of problems is set within the context of nation-states.  

Finally, Black nationalists never spoke of "economic justice" (i.e., fair treatment within the existing economic system) for that suggests that capitalism is concerned with equitable outcomes - which it is not.  Black nationalists did not view the economic system in this manner and this is what prompted them to talk about separation and exiting the US polity and/or economy - things that are largely missed in the current conversation.  In contrast, BLM+ seems to envision a situation where the polity steps forward to rectify the problems of the economy.  

This is not to say that BLM+ is wrong as much of what they have to say is currently being formulated.  Rather, it is to say that moving forward, as problems are being identified as well as potential solutions it will be useful to highlight what has come before and juxtapose it against that which is being said now.  
2 Comments

Strange Fruit, Stranger Tree

6/22/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
Painting by Juliet Seignious
Since I came out of graduate school in the 1990s, I have been collecting a list of databases concerning anti-black violence (I think that it is up to about 40 or 50 at this point).  Every time I would come across another source, I would make a copy and put it on a drive somewhere.  When I was at Notre Dame (about 10 years ago), I was asked to give some presentation about something that I wanted to work on but never seemed to get to (great question) and I put together "Strange Fruit Incorporated: Understanding Anti-Black Violence and Discrimination, 1619-2010".  The title was inspired by the famous poem/song:

STRANGE FRUIT
 
        Seven trees
        Bearin' strange fruit
        Blood on the leaves
        And blood at the roots
 
        Black bodies
        Swinging in the southern breeze
        Strange fruit hangin'
        From the poplar trees
 
        Pastoral scene
        Of the gallant south
        Them big bulging eyes
 
        And the twisted mouth
 
        Scent of magnolia
        Clean and fresh
        Then the sudden smell
        Of burnin' flesh
 
        Here is a fruit
        For the crows to pluck
        For the rain to gather
        For the wind to suck
        For the sun to rot
        For the leaves to drop
 
        Here is
        Strange and bitter crop 

While tremendously moved by this work, my effort at collecting data was directed toward highlighting a particular shortcoming of the piece, one which seems perfect to revisit under the current wave of protests and discussion: there was so much more violence than lynching.  Connected to the same insight, I wrote some spoken word piece about 20 years ago that captured the sentiment:

Strange Fruit, Stranger Tree

Now, I never really heard the words to the Lewis Allen poem that was stolen/borrowed and popularized by Billy Holiday; 
 
Later only to be heralded as the poster child for all that was evil 
 
It was a small poster at first but then it made its way up north, then abroad and at that point it simultaneously served as a sore point, a rallying cry and a backdrop to picnics.  
 
It was this latter image that occurred to me as I lay there under this tree.  Now, don’t ask me what kind of tree it was; I’m from Manhattan.  I don’t know from maple or cedar or cyprus (except from the hill).   
 
What’s the difference anyway – here, all dem could be used to serve the same purpose; this occurred to me in something of a shock to the system.
 
But I digress,
for my point is actually
a          
very              
simple                             
observation:
 
up until this moment, this very second, now this milliesecond 

all of the attention has been given to the fruit – 
this “Strange and bitter crop”
 
                        the thing       
        For the crows to pluck
        For the rain to gather
        For the wind to suck
        For the sun to rot
        For the leaves to drop
 
But what about the thing that grew this thing?  
 
What about the f@cking tree?   
 
What about the branches that could bear such a fruit, 
what about the trunk that holds the fruit in tact?
 
what about the roots that lay beneath this fruit? 
 
most importantly –
            how do we kill the seed 
that created the tree
so that the fruit never returns?  
 
            That is what I want to understand
 
The second and third line of the poem actually leads us to ask this question
 
        Blood on the leaves
        And blood at the roots
 
But Lewis and Billy never really get us off the fruit, 
ever the fruit, ever the fruit  
 
His/Her voice moving through but essentially always above us, 
into the tree, 
to the branches 
out to the fruit (yet again)
 
Now, I aint bad mouthin' Lewis or Billy - especially the latter
she had enough to deal with
                        With depression, and addiction, and napster wannabees 
(well only the last one now, she fruit too)
 
In fact we owe him/her a debt of gratitude because Invariably, Lewis and Billy got us to look up 
and then hundreds, nay thousands, perhaps millions  
keep looking up.  
 
But that was then.  
 
We need to look down now, 
and around 
and over.  
 
            For, like the giving tree (that children’s book),
 
what was once used for fruit was deconstructed, reconstructed and placed back below us, and around us and above us.  
 
            How’s it go:
 
                        So wide you can’t get around it
                        So low you cant get under it
                        So high you can’t get over it
 
Not seeing fruit, we thought, 
We think 
that things were/are just fine.  
 
Not seeing big bulging eyes
        And the twisted mouths 
on the branches of a tree
 
                        We assumed that things had improved.  
 
But TVs and newspapers and magazines is made out of wood ain’t 
they?   
 
this is where the bulging eyes and twisted mouths moved to.
 
            They move to: 
soundtracks and nike adds and new ailey pieces
            They move to: 
the left, no sorry to the right (ever to the right)
            They move
                        As we sit, puzzled by the familiarity but the difference
 
Not seeing, smelling, feeling and hearing burning flesh
 
                        We assumed that things had improved.
 
But they burn fruits now everyday in harris county, texas, 
in Tennessee, in Jersey and even IDAHO
 
The chairs they make fruits sit in when they send them from the earth made out of wood to, 
ain’t they?
 
Now, I’m not saying that we got wood all around us
            I mean 
when I was living in Colorado 
I would always here about some hippies that were 
                        Hugging some trees saying that we should preserve them 
so that they can grow back 
and grow back big and strong
 
                        and these efforts seemed kinda effective
                                    cause I saw trees all over the place there
                                                in Colorado, in DC, in Portland
 
well, I don’t know about you but I think that we should 
seriously reconsider this argument
 
I don’t know about you but 
I burn down these things 
whenever I come across them
 
                        In the woods, in the libraries or in the minds
 
Damn, why do you think that fruits moved up north when they had the chance
 
In philly, new yark and other places you have to look long and hard for something other than concrete
 
Now, they still have trees and some bushes too:
They show up in taxi cabs, night sticks, hospitals, underemployment lines and white houses of authority 
 
They show up in coffee houses, the front and sometimes the back of restaurants and on the subway (if you look closely)
 
Regardless,
 
the point is that we need to start 
removing these sh@ts
 
                        These singled stemmed erect growths
 
Actually, I wont be completely happy (nor will Lewis or Billy’s ghost by the way) until the whole damn thing is made artificial – 
 
            You know as in made 
by humans
            For humans
            To become humans     
 
                                    Strange fruit? 
 
Nah, my friend, that’s old school 
 
Stranger tree!                                      
                                                                        That’s what's up


Clearly, with the recent revelations, the stark nature of the strange fruit has returned and the images have been resoundingly rejected by a great many people.  We don't want to see this in the country we reside in seems to be the message.  This has no place here.  But two things occur to me:

1) African Americans were subject to a wide variety of violent behavior for several hundred years and it is going to take some time to unearth all of it in order to understand what has transpired.  The police violence directed against black folk is merely the tip of the iceberg and there should be an effort to evaluate the whole berg.

2) While the unearthing is taking place, it might be good for everyone to remember the Elisabeth Kubler-Ross model regarding emotional stages when faced with someone's death or the threat thereof (i.e., denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance) as well as realize that this model is wrong. As the author of one review notes:

It is time to realize that grief takes countless forms, is experienced in limitless ways, and cannot possibly be explained by a simple five stage model. When we push this narrative as universal, we alienate those for whom it doesn’t apply and only cause them more pain in an already painful time.

There is no right way to grieve. There is no wrong way to grieve. And I hope that when you experience grief you can take some small comfort in knowing that how ever you’re feeling is just fine.

This might be useful information as we realize that we might not all be in the same space right now.  For example, many individuals in the U.S. seek a resolution to police violence and they would like to get started on making this happen - now.  Some might need to release their lived experience about life under the gun/under threat however and they might not yet be ready to sit down and talk with their oppressor.  Some might need to scream.  Some might need to break something.  Some might need to sleep.  Some might need to type.  Some might not ever be ready and basically won't be coming on the journey of correction/reform/revolution.  We will need to take care of these people for they were damaged by the Strange Tree that we could not control.  

​As we maintain a wide-eyed view of the abuses that were directed against African Americans (including but beyond simply the police and prison officials) we need to keep an equally wide-eyed view of the different responses that people have to this abuse as well as the opening for people to finally express these feelings.  Have no doubt that we are grieving - all of us, a loss of innocence for some and an opening to bear witness for others.  We cannot go back but some of us might be stuck there.  We need to go forward but not all of us are going to make it.  
0 Comments

It Will Take a Nation of Millions to Hold Them Back or, How the Effort to Curb Police Violence Will Require a Movement of Movements

6/17/2020

7 Comments

 

Christian Davenport
Sarah A. Soule

Picture
In 1988, the rap group Public Enemy released the album – It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold us Back.  The title of the album and the now classic songs contained on it were intended to highlight the individuals and institutions that were and have been used to keep African Americans tamed and in line.  In an important turn of phrase, we use a similar title here to note that if police violence in America is to be tamed and kept in line, it will take more than the courageous people out in the streets protesting. It will take a movement of movements. 
 
This position differs from the sentiment following the American Civil Rights Movement (ACRM) – the unofficial guiding light and touchstone for discussing political change in this country.  That sentiment was that the fight by African Americans to get a seat at the table was won, but then (as now) it was time to let a different group of people (i.e., politicians and lawyers) get to the serious business of policy and lawmaking.  This sentiment is reflected in Bayard Rustin’s 1965 work, From Protest to Politics and in the recent comments of President Barack Obama:
 
  • I’ve heard some suggest that the recurrent problem of racial bias in our criminal justice system proves that only protests and direct action can bring about change, and that voting and participation in electoral politics is a waste of time. I couldn’t disagree more. The point of protest is to raise public awareness, to put a spotlight on injustice, and to make the powers that be uncomfortable; in fact, throughout American history, it’s often only been in response to protests and civil disobedience that the political system has even paid attention to marginalized communities. But eventually, aspirations have to be translated into specific laws and institutional practices— and in a democracy, that only happens when we elect government officials who are responsive to our demands.
 
The approach we advocate differs from this sentiment.  Our approach holds that it is not prudent to let people go behind closed doors and get to the serious business of governance without expanding the number of participants at the table and getting rid of the idea that only what takes place at the table is worth doing.  We did this already and it did not turn out well.  We need a new way.
 
Our path to this conclusion begins with a reflection on the recent sequence of events in the US, and some reflection on the history of social movements in the US as well as abroad. The recent wave of protests started simple enough. In the wake of three horrific deaths at the hands of police (again), African Americans protested (again).  The police responded aggressively (again). Then something different happened - other folks protested.  Interestingly and somewhat bafflingly, the police generally continued to respond aggressively, but there were also some solidarity efforts (a knee here, a hug there). Then other countries protested in solidarity about treatment of black Americans, but also to address the treatment of their own persecuted and vulnerable.  Equally interesting and somewhat baffling, is the relatively rapid political response: firings of officers, investigations into prior behavior, discussions about defunding and abolition of police departments and legislation to curb coercive policing.  Some of these ideas are new, but most of them come off a dusty shelf, where they waited in abeyance for the chance to be reconsidered.
 
Why not let the politicians and lawyers take it from here?  Didn’t African Americans and their allies who stood up against state-sponsored violence “win”?  Isn’t change a-coming?  Shouldn’t folks just go home now, and let the policy and lawmakers get to work? As scholars of social movements, we acknowledge that the movement has done what movements do best: they got important issues on the agenda, and they did so deftly and swiftly.  But we also note that the post-ACRM sentiment of “protest to politics” misunderstands the nature of change – portraying change as if it were one-way and irreversible. The post-ACRM sentiment assumes that there are knowledgeable and trustworthy insiders who can work through the mechanics translating the movement into concrete and effective policies. If this were the case, countless black lives would not have been lost in the decades following the ACRM.
 
Our movement of movements approach (MoMA) acknowledges the need for multiple institutions and people to be involved. It is clear that politicians, lawyers, public policy experts and social scientists will be needed to draft and propose legislation. Our approach acknowledges the need for lawyers to prosecute deviations from whatever laws are established, and it acknowledges the need for journalists to investigate and report on all aspects of the problem, the solutions proposed and the compliance (or lack thereof) that follows. It acknowledges that changes made might be lost, thus there must be an effort to monitor and mitigate backsliding. None of this should be surprising, as it emerges from the post-ACRM approach.
 
But here is where MoMa diverges from the post-ACRM approach.  Our approach requires all hands on deck. Teachers will be needed to teach about both police violence and how to challenge it. Parents will be needed to help their children learn and grow as anti-racists. Lobbyists will be needed to lobby for better policies. Artists (writers, singers, rappers, painters, dancers, performance artists, comic and graphic novelists, film makers) will be needed to tell the stories of what has been and what could be. Perhaps we need to get Lin Manuel to create “Stop and Frisk” – the musical?  Students will be needed to study, learn, provoke and populate the other categories on this list.  Elders will be needed to tell stories, give advice and stand aside.  Doctors and health care providers will be needed to treat those in need without bias. Corporations will be needed to clean their houses of discriminatory practices.  Clergy and counselors (and all decent human beings) will be needed to help those subjected to police violence to heal, in a human centered and empathetic way, meeting them where they are. Researchers will be needed to place racism/white supremacy front and center in fields of inquiry.  Foundations will be needed to support the investigation of coercion, force, and violations of human rights here and abroad.  Graphic designers will be needed to give us a logo, and marketing experts will be needed to make MoMa something that sparks the imaginations of American youth, as the Peace Corps once did.  Police will be needed to police, but they must do so in a way that is deemed acceptable as they begin their more limited role in society.  And, yes, when necessary we will need citizens to remove their regular clothing and become protestors (again) in order to protest deviations and delays.   
 
It will take a nation of millions to hold them back!  Toward this end of moving MoMa forward, we invite all citizens (in as well as out of the United States) to take the Movements of Movements Pledge (#MOMAPledge).  
 
We promise to devote a minimum of 10% of their time to learn about racism, coercion, violence, peace and assist in building an effective functioning democracy. 
 
This effort can involve searching, reading, reflecting, discussing, donating, volunteering, constructing, but it can also involve engaging in town halls and teach outs/ins. It can also involve citizens showing up for one another, as in the mutual aid movement, which will be necessary until we address the problems of poverty and inequality in the US.   It will indeed take a nation of millions to hold them back but the past few weeks of protest seems to indicate that we may have the numbers to pull this off.  
7 Comments

Anti-Police Violence Discussion Should Move Beyond Negative Peace

6/16/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture

​Can we find a way to stop the police from killing black people?  The question is a simple and powerful one.  As an African American male, it is also one that I have been waiting to hear for most of my life.  While overjoyed to have people from all parts of the nation as well as the world calling for this, at the same time I am a little disappointed at the limited nature of the ask.  Limited you say?  Yes, limited.  I think that trying to find a way to stop the police from killing black people is analogous to what is often referred to as “negative peace” (i.e., when violence has stopped).  In my book with Erik Melander and Pat Regan called the Peace Continuum, we noted that most scholarship on political conflict and violence maintained a focus on this form of peace and it has thus been “conflict-centric”.  This is clearly understandable as life is something to be treasured and sustained.  Following from this, we see discussions of training, demilitarizing, defunding, prosecuting, socializing and essentially scaring the police in an effort to reduce their violence.   
 
In the right direction, there is something more to peace.  What we should aspire to is more than just stopping violence and this something more should be incorporated directly into the discussion. Within our book, this something more is often referred to as “positive peace”.  Rooted in the work of individuals such as Dorothy Thompson, W.E.B. DuBois, Karl Deutsch, Quincy Wright, Johan Galtung, Kenneth as well as Elise Boulding and Martin Luther King Jr., the concept involves structuring relationships in such a way that there is not only no violence but also a degree of harmony or what we preferred to call "mutuality".  I fear that if we begin this conversation framed around negative peace than we don’t get to the richer, more gratifying and deeper positive peace.  As I state in the book,
 
At the (far) end of the (peace) continuum is “mutuality” — the clearest and most extreme example of quality peace. This refers to where distinct actors make claims for an overarching, mutually respectful relationship with another actor, and they use diverse noncoercive strategies to achieve the relevant end. As conceived, a situation can be said to be mutual when the relevant groups engage in behavior together that is intended to create, continue, and deepen a sense of common purpose, as well as identity. This includes celebrations, parades, programs, discussions, and so forth. The creation of organizations with all relevant groups being included (as well as directed toward the same ends) captures an institutional manifesta­tion of mutuality. A third concerns language; situations of mutuality put forward constant references to a shared sense of identity and a common mission. Clearly, there needs to be mutual consideration of what is being discussed, as well as what is done to discern cheap talk from substantive behavior, but nevertheless it is important to acknowledge that even if talk does not correlate with action, it is still an advancement over not talking at all. With regard to values, individuals from the respective groups come to envision themselves as part of a shared community. This involves some­thing analogous to what could be labeled positive “shared direction,” when identifying that one’s life is intricately connected with another. This dimension is clearly less observable than others.
 
As one can tell from the definition, the current discussion in the US about what should be done regarding the police and their violence is far from mutuality.  We are clearly in the realm of negative peace seemingly afraid to venture too far into the realm of positive peace.  I suggest that we dream that dream.  I suggest that we venture into the unknown and think about a world where mutuality is the norm not simply not killing one another.  In short, I suggest that we try to build the world that we actually wish to live in, not the world that we believe will be better than the one that we just came from.  

0 Comments

Looking Back to Look Forward: Recovering the Black Radical Voice

6/10/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
In the current episode of protest and uprising folks are starting to look for answers about what could be done about police violence in particular and the police in general.  What is largely absent from these conversations is the radical flank of American society – i.e., those activists from organizations that are either no longer here or that have been significantly hindered by anti-radical movement efforts over the past 100 years.  I will attempt to highlight a few of them over the next few weeks but I will begin with a group called the Republic of New Africa (RNA) which I discussed in my book “Why Social Movements Die”.
 
When I was writing about the book about the group many people were unclear about why I was doing this.  The book on the Black Panther Party before that made sense to them because people had heard of it but who was the RNA?  Why turn to them?  I want to revisit the RNA in the current moment because what they highlighted as problematic is extremely important for framing discussions moving forward.  
 
The RNA emerged out of a civil rights group that tried to fit in/integrate called GOAL – The Group on Advanced Leadership in the early 1960s.  What the group wanted to do was fairly straightforward.  They wanted to get a decent foothold in the existing political-economy through a variety of strategies that addressed they felt were holding them back:

  • 1. Schools:
    • Equalizing class size to white institutions;
    • Using the same tests for all students;
    • Firing prejudiced, lazy teachers; and,
    • Getting truthful history and textbooks.
  • 2. Justice:
    • Ending Shoot-to-kill policies by the police;
    • Firing “brutal” cops;
    • Halting illegal search and arrest; and,
    • Learning how to shoot a rifle.
  • 3. Jobs:
    • Installing the GOAL “full-employment” plan.
  • 4. Economic Self-Help:
    • Investing with GOAL to build a Negro-Owned bank.
 
If these four ideas/policies were addressed, the group felt that blacks would have a chance in America. Note the attention given to the police and the specific policies noted there.  Also note the call to have blacks learn to shoot under the label of justice.  
 
The efforts of this group led many to push further in the domain of electoral politics.  The group concluded that what hindered black Americans was the limitation of the two-party system.  What was needed they concluded was independent political action where African Americans could move between parties in accordance to whoever was providing the better policies for black folk.  This led several members to assist Republican George Romney in his bid for Governor in 1962. The outcome was not really what they had in mind.  Romney won but it did not lead to any benefits for black folks in general or even the ones that helped get him elected.  
 

            
Picture
During this time the group came to be advised by Malcolm X - newly freed from the Nation of Islam and someone who's name has not really been mentioned in 2020  This Malcolm was broadly interested in challenging the political system, confronting the political, economic and cultural assaults that black people were subject to and bringing the widest possible number of black folk together.  The idea was to create and wield power in a way that would alleviate stressors and violence from black life.  As one of the members of the group stated,
 
by Malcolm’s speech in November of that memorable year  (1963). . . we knew, through struggle, of the immensity of the work that faced the black man in America if we were to be truly free. Through struggle we knew of our own limited resources and the great skill and care that would be required were we to support our revolution from these resources – and we were obliged to, unless we wished to be bought and owned by the enemy. We knew, through struggle, of the great pressures that operate upon the black man to make him doubt the need for revolution, to slow down and seek his liberation through a personal acquisition of gadgets and wealth . . . And we knew, finally, through struggle, that we needed something more than the hopelessly too-small-always first aid, the pit-of-the-stomach-empty reforms, of a civil rights organization like GOAL. We needed power. Malcolm told us how – through setting up our own nation: that was our only real hope. 
 
As I state in my book, Malcolm X was very clear on what blacks needed.  He thought that they needed a nation of their own as this was the only way to guarantee that they would he heard and that the weapons of the state would not be turned against them.  In addition to this, he went on to say that 
 
(T)hey needed some friends and allies (preferably outside of the United States) as well as a new “interpretation” of the civil rights “thing.” As he pointed out, civil rights are domestic issues, which are dealt with or not dealt with within the United States. Human rights, however, are international issues, which are dealt with within the international realm. This is crucial, for he argues that “when you take your case to Washington, D.C., you’re taking it to the criminal who’s responsible; its like running from the wolf to the fox. They’re all in cahoots together. They all work political chicanery and make you look like a chump before the eyes of the world” (X 1964). Malcolm X went on to speak about guerilla warfare and the fact that this is perhaps the most effective way to counter a superior military power. He also identified that black nationalism (defined as African Americans controlling the politics and politicians, the economics and economic units of production, as well as the values within the black community) was already practiced by many within the Christian church, the NAACP, CORE, the SNCC, by Muslims, atheists, and agnostics. They just didn’t call it that (and this was something noted by those who had been in GOAL earlier). In a dramatic change from his previous incarnation that suggested everyone join the NOI, Malcolm X argued that if an organization was practicing black nationalism, it should be joined. It didn’t matter which one; all paths led to empowerment.
 
While intrigued by these ideas, the group was not quite ready to give up on electoral politics.  A second strategy concerned developing an independent party that could more directly and aggressively pursue the things that the black community needed.  This led them to form the Michigan chapter of the Freedom Now Party.  The idea was to break free from the shackles of two-party domination and advocate for African Americans.  Unfortunately, this group could not unseat the existing parties and the bids for political office generally ended up with massive defeats. 
 
While trying to figure out what to do next, Malcolm X was murdered and shortly after this many black people in Detroit engaged in what is alternatively characterized as a rebellion or riot in 1967 following an questionable police raid and subsequent aggressiveness as well as violence.  In this context, the group reimagined itself first as the “Malcolm X Society” (i.e., the Children of Malcolm) and then as the Republic of New Africa (RNA).  The new group was interested in four things:
 
  • 1. Establish a government for Africans in America;
  • 2. Obtain land for the establishment of an independent country in the deep South: Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina;18
  • 3. Hold a plebiscite among Blacks in order to determine the “national status” of the “New Afrikan population in North America”; and,
  • 4. Obtain reparations for the treatment of Blacks as slaves19
 
Now, I do not want to spend the time and space here to talk about why the RNA chose all of the objectives that they did for that is done in the book and the RNA does this quite well themselves.  Rather, here I would like to talk about why the group thought that it needed a government and ponder how this is relevant to the current discussion about what to do with police violence and the police.  
 
As many know, nation-states are in part defined by the coercive/force-wielding capacity of central authorities.  If one wanted to stop being treated violently by these actors therefore then assuming control over the agents of coercion and force would be a logical solution.  This is what the RNA offered.  Given the fact that winning elections was perceived to be difficult to do and that even with victory control over the use of coercion and force might be limited in addition to always being beholden to those with previously generated economic wealth, continuing under US jurisdiction did not seem to be a viable option.  In addition to this, the idea
 
was to remove the Malcolmites and the other black nationalist revolutionaries in America from a position where the United States might with impunity destroy them to a position where attacks upon us by the United States become international matters, threatening world peace, and thereby within reach of the United Nations, thereby within reach of our friends in Africa and Asia who would help us. We could not entertain hope of help in our struggle from international sources so long as we conducted our struggle within the United States federal union and as if we were citizens of the United States . . . The Republic was brought about, when it was, to frustrate hostile action of the United States against the seekers of land and power for blacks on this continent, and to create proper safeguards for ultimate success. (Obadele 1968, 3) 
 
Consider the important differences here from the current moment and discussion. 

  • To the RNA, blacks form a distinct group that deserves sovereignty, control over its own destiny and coercive/forceful power;
 
No one now seems to be making the case that African Americans have a separate identity from other Americans and thus everything is being framed as granting rights to African Americans as every other American (theoretically). 

  • To the RNA black, persecution becomes a thing of international concern – not just to citizens of these countries who take action in solidarity but as a thing of concern to international law, monitoring and potentially action from governments as well as INGOs.
 
Presently, people around the world are protesting but this seems to be where things end.  No one is talking about doing anything else discussed like in the R2P - Right to Protect, which calls upon other nations to intervene if violence is being enacted against the citizens of another nation seemingly beyond the control of the government in question.  This is in part because the civil as opposed to human rights framing has been adopted.

  • Finally, to the RNA the problem of anti-black violence is something that is not believed to be resolvable until black power has been developed.
 
This is a very different framing from the extension of democratic citizenship frame that is currently under development but what if there is something worth noting here?  What if political and economic empowerment facilitates democratic citizenship?  If this is the case, then discussions of wealth gaps, reparations, land theft discussed in Pigford v. Glickman and the place of African Americans in the US and global economy are all worthy of discussion.  At the moment, this is not well being addressed.  

I offer the RNA here as but one slice into what needs to become a fuller discussion of all interpretations and solutions put forward earlier.  US history is filled with such proposals.  Now is the time to dust them off and bring them forward. 
0 Comments

Contentious Politics 101: Politicians, Police, People & Protestors - A Citizen's and Media's Guide to What's Going On

6/5/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
There are a great many people now interested as well as talking about what is going on throughout America right now regarding the protests and policing in response to them.  Frankly, much of this discussion isn’t useful. Folks have opinions but individuals have been studying the relevant phenomenon systematically since the 1930s and we can find theoretical musings about them going back much further.  Unfortunately, these people are not being picked to speak.  Rather than looking at the members of the Peace Science Society (International), where I happened to be President at the moment, or one of the premier conflict journals (e.g., the Journal of Peace Research, the Journal of Conflict Resolution, Mobilization and Conflict Management and Peace Science) or even one of the general journals that occasionally includes something relevant to protest and protest policing/repression (e.g., the American Political Science Review or the American Sociological Review), it seems that the media is looking for people at the top 5-10 ranked Universities and asking them what’s up.  A more thorough individual will pull up someone that wrote a book with a nice title or someone that has recently been in the news.  Regardless, most of the people that study this stuff all the time are not getting any light and our collective conversation is suffering because of it.
 
Déjà vu.  I feel like I did after 9/11.  Folks just started being asked to talk about things and instead of passing interested parties to the dozen or so people who had been studying this topic, they decided to speak.  The outcome: this does not lead to the best of what we have to offer.  It’s not all that informative as it is largely the product of Academic Accidental Tourists – those who decide to stray from what they have been trained to do as well as what they have done and to take up the topic of contentious politics/conflict processes as an “expert”.  While problematic, this does have the benefit of being entertaining and occasionally quite popular.  
 
So, what have folks gotten wrong?  How should we think about what is going on based on actual scholarship?  What if the right people were doing the talking – what would be highlighted?
 
Before we do that, let’s start with the actors a little.  Most students of contentious politics/conflict processes (i.e., genocide, civil war, human rights violation/state repression, [counter] terrorism, [counter] revolution, [counter] protest or protest policing and everyday resistance) would highlight four groups that are involved: 1) politicians (as the leaders of relevant political institutions that set policy/practices), 2) police (as the coercive/forceful agents of the state), 3) people (ordinary citizens who will choose to support politicians/the police, protestors or neither as well as 4) protestors (those who explicitly decide to challenge political authorities with some activity outside institutionalized mechanisms).  No, who and what you start with varies but the differences are important.
 
Sequences are always important, part 1.  We currently have mass protests going on because of activities undertaken by the police directed against specific individuals in specific communities.  In short, politicians and police started the contentious interaction.  Politicians created the relevant coercive/forceful state institutions.  They gave them directions/mandates, cash, training and a license to kill (in their name).  It is worthwhile to acknowledge this because many are calling upon these same actors to fix the problem of state-sponsored violence via reforms.  But, if these actors started the sequence of activities that led us to our current situation, then we may need to take politicians and police out of the loop – call it a conflict of interest.  At a minimum, it may be necessary to bring in a third party to negotiate/facilitate change.  Of course, saying this impugns US state sovereignty but frankly so does the violent action that they took/allowed against those under their care.  Police violence undermines any respect or legitimacy that the government might have had.  This discussion is largely missing in the things that we are currently reading.
 
Sequences are always important, part 2. Research is fairly clear on the fact that protest leads to repression but what is not as commonly referenced is that it leads to different types/dimensions of repression – overt and covert, indiscriminate/selective/ collective, reactive/proactive and civil liberties restriction/personal integrity violations.  Interestingly, and in contrast to the uniform relationship identified above, repression leads to every type of influence of protest: e.g., increases, decreases, delayed influences and no impact at all.  What this means is that it is going to be a little difficult to figure out what is going to happen next because of the variation identified above.  This does not mean that we have no clue, only that tracking and understanding dynamic interactions will be crucial. 
 
Democracy itself hangs in the balance.  Now, to be clear, I do not feel that it is just black and increasingly white, Latino, Asian and other lives that are at stake.  It is the very democracy itself.  Perhaps Ralph Bunche said it best in The Political Status of the Negro in the Age of FDR:
 
  • If Democracy is to survive the severe trials and buffetings to which it is being subjected in the modern world, it will do so only because it can demonstrate that it is a practical, living philosophy under which all people can live the good life most abundantly.  It must prove itself in practice, or be discredited as a theory.  Democratic nations such as (America) have an obligation to all mankind to prove that democracy, as a form of government, as a practical means of human relationships, is a working and workable concept.  This America can do only by abandoning the shallow, vulgar pretense of limited democracy – under which some are free and privileged and others are permanently fettered (1940: 106).  
 
As he continues,
 
  • The (African American), and especially the (African American) in the South (potentially changed to the North in the current context), already has had too vivid an experience with embryonic fascism in the very shadow of democracy. Within our own gates are found intense racial hatreds, racial ghettoes, and racial differentials that saturate the political, economic and social life of the nation (1940: 106).
 
Either the problem gets fixed or the United States is not a democracy.  Some have gone this route with discussions of comparative authoritarianism but it merits stating this simple proposition as it is not often seen in the current conversation – at least in mainstream venues.  I’m sure Bob Avakian has mentioned this 20 times already.
 
Actors are not Unitary.  Researchers know this but current discussion seems to have this point confused.  All individuals out in the street when a protest is taking place are not down with the program.  Some are there for justice.  Some are there for Justine and/or Jeff – personal connections are incredibly important for understanding contentious events.  Some are there for Sony or Gucci.  And protests which are organized by some institution for a particular as well as clearly articulated objective are not the same as uprisings/disturbances/riots which are not developed/controlled by institutions and which are not associated with particular as well as clearly articulated objectives.  The looting in the media focus exemplifies this confusion.  Articles make it seem that at one turn an individual is out objecting to illegitimate state-sponsored violence, some window breaks and then this same individual decides to go for a laptop.  Folks then bemoan the tactical choice of “the movement” but this is not movement activity soooooooo.  Holding protestors accountable for those looting is not reasonable.  From the work of Clark McPhail it is not even close to being reasonable.  McPhail finds incredible variation within the same protest event.   There is no clear connection or chain of command like in a military or police unit.  Now, in these setting it would be reasonable to hold everyone accountable for what is done because of how they are organized.  
 
All is not always what it seems. Researchers of contentious politics would warn observers that just because someone looks like a protestor does not mean that they are one (see Gary Marx’s work).  There are informants (those who would provide intel) and agents provocateur (those who purportedly instigate and escalate something in order to facilitate legitimate/legitimized state action) out there.  This generally does not go the other way: there are few movement people embedded within police units to start something.  Watch but always wonder.
 
Beware of the Channel.  Finally, much of what we see being discussed is on the coercion/force end of contentious politics but there are other strategies that are relevant – channeling (see James Scott and Jennifer Earl for this one).  Here, we would see an effort to bring protestors under control by placating them – making them feel heard, empowered and involved but without having any real impact on anything.  One could see this in current calls for leadership, questions about organizations being created and highlighting the newest voice of the generation.  Two things on this: 1) if there is no leader/messiah/organization, then there is no one to coopt; and 2) if there is no specific person/organization, then politicians and police might actually have to speak to all individuals and/or, more realistically, assess the condition that prompted everyone to rise up in the first place (i.e., politicians and police).
 
Luckily, I see that some contentious politics folks are finally getting tapped by decent venues: e.g., Cathy Schneider and David Meyer in The Washington Post today (which requires setting up an account which just feels wrong somehow so I don't have links to them).  

More folks out there.  All hands on deck.
0 Comments

Proportionality and Dis-Proportionality in Protest and Police Tactics

5/31/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
David Armstrong, Thomas Zeitzoff and myself once wrote a paper about how different people perceived the severity of different tactics that could be selected by protestors and police.  In this work, we used a survey to identify what were perceived to be proportionate tactics as well as those which were perceived to be disproportionate.  The idea was that those which were believed to be comparable in terms of their degree of lethality/severity would not raise much of an eyebrow but those where either the police or protestors used behavior that was deemed to be non-comparable/disproportionate would piss people off - prompting perceptions of illegitimacy on behalf of the disproportionate actor and a willingness to support the actor viewed as being poorly treated. 
Picture
Marching in the streets being met with pepper spray and tear gas is clearly in the zone of disproportionate response.  Looking at the current wave of protests and protest-policing moving across the US we can see all types of combinations of protestor and police action. I provide the chart above to help you better understand what choices are being made by the actors involved as well as how different combinations of protestor and police tactical choices will likely influence subsequent attitudes as well as behavior.  

Now, one of the more interesting findings of this paper was that blacks and whites did not perceive the same tactics as being equally lethal/severe.  In fact, whites were more willing to give police a pass viewing certain tactics as being less problematic whereas blacks were more willing to give protestors a pass viewing certain tactics as being less problematic.  Essentially, this means that what we see taking place out in the streets will not generally be viewed in similar manners across distinct audiences and that our perceptions will likely lead to distinct actions in the aftermath of relevant activities.  It's not all bleak however.  What is interesting here is that it may be the case that when especially disproportionate activities are undertaken, we might see a convergence of opinion and in these moments we might actually find people coming together.  The latter insight was beyond the study mentioned but it definitely seems possible thus providing a little possibility of peaceful engagement amidst the dark cloud of future contention.
0 Comments

Black to the Future, Part 15: 1969 @ 2019, a 50 year Retrospective of the Republic of New Africa

5/10/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
Series Intro

Almost four years ago, my book about the Republic of New Africa (RNA) came out entitled "How Social Movements Die: Repression and Demobilization of the Republic of New Africa. In the book, I attempted to strike a balance between theory and social science versus simply telling the story of the RNA.  Unfortunately, I had to leave a lot of information out of the book and some of the details that were otherwise fascinating were eliminated.  In this series, I revisit the archive and present the material 50 years later.  Apologies for not being able to continue this piece for a while but life interfered.  Enjoy.  I will try to work my way backwards from this event as well as forwards.  ​​

Following the New Bethel Incident

For several decades researchers (including myself) having been documenting, theorizing and examining the impact of state repression on subsequent mobilization.  The findings have been stably mixed.  Researchers have found that arrests, detention and killing sponsored by political authorities have provoked fear as well as anger, leading to both lesser and greater amounts of protest. Some work finds no impact at all.  Looking for an explanation for the variation?  Don't look at the literature.  It cannot really help you.

Exploring this topic two years ago, Christopher Sullivan and myself finished an article (entitled "The Rebel Alliance Strikes Back: Understanding the Politics of Backlash Mobilization") where we employed data obtained from the shooting, mass arrest and interrogation of the Republic of New Africa by Detroit Police Department.  I discussed this event in earlier blog posts (here as well as here) and of course my book How Social Movements Die.

In this piece, we discovered that existing research had potentially been missing something because of its generally high level of aggregation to the nation-state as well as across groups.  By focusing on individual and group-specific dynamics, we identify that there were two distinct impacts of state repression on movement behavior (e.g., meetings and protests) as well as participation (i.e., showing up at meetings and RNA activities).

At the group level, mobilization increased.  Committing the raid, arrest and interrogation is estimated to have increased RNA events by 6 events in the week following after NBI took place. The long-term effects of New Bethel are estimated to have increased contentious activity by 8 events. 

At the individual level, mobilization was increased as well as decreased.  Regarding the former, those in the RNA who were attending the meeting and shot at/arrested/interrogated not only stayed but ramped up their attendance as well as participation. Regarding the latter, those in the RNA who were not in attendance at New Bethel stopped showing up to events and meetings.  In addition to this, there was a third group (i.e., those who were not in the RNA before the New Bethel Incident but who joined afterward).  This number grows for a bit after New Bethel.  

So the mixed findings going back three decades might have actually been accurate.  The key to understanding which way mobilization will go involves getting into the target group and following specifically who is in the group.  This is the way to go.
0 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>

    Analog - The Anti-Blog

    By "Analog" I am referring to the adjective (i.e., relating to or using signals or information represented by a continuously variable physical quantity such as spatial position or voltage) and not the noun (i.e., a person or thing seen as comparable to another) for I wished to give voice to my thoughts which have come to me in a more or less continuous manner but which do so in a way that is not consistent in content or form. Thus you will see short stories, brief thoughts, haikus, low-kus and even a political cartoon or two. 

    Winner of Best Blog Post for 2014 by International Studies Association

    Picture

    Archives

    December 2022
    October 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    May 2021
    April 2021
    January 2021
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    September 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    December 2014
    September 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013

    Categories

    All
    Activism
    Art
    Black Power/nationalism
    Communication
    Counter-terrorism
    Data
    Database
    Education
    Elitism
    Ethnicity
    Fashion
    Friends
    Genocide
    Global Blackness
    Hip Hop
    Human Rights Violation
    Identity
    India
    Inequality
    Memories
    Norway
    Passing
    Political Conflict
    Political Tourism
    Political Violence
    Poverty
    Racism
    Republic-of-new-africa
    Research
    Revolution
    Rwanda
    Sexism
    Social Media
    State Repression
    Struggle
    Terrorism
    Travel
    United States
    Untouchability

    RSS Feed

Picture