Clay Carson’s In Struggle: SNCC and the Black Awakening of the 1960s uses the trajectory of
SNCC’s radicalism in the 1960s both to analyze the black civil rights movement
as a historical struggle and to draw conclusions based on this struggle about
social movements more generally. He
divides SNCC’s history into three broad segments: formation of a grassroots
organization around the dual foci of non-violent protest strategies and
socioeconomic programs to help poor rural Southern blacks; organizational
centralization and internal strife related to a deepening understanding of the
extent of structural racism in the United States and conflict over whether
separatism or interracial collaboration would best address it; and a turn
toward generating black power ideology and away from social programs that
resulted in the failure of SNCC and a dissipation of the civil rights movement
more generally. As Carson assembles oral
histories, meeting transcripts, newspaper accounts, and other sources into this
general narrative, several historically contingent conclusions emerge. First and foremost, Carson argues that the
black civil rights movement (as SNCC) was most successful at effecting social
change early in the movement, when it was able to balance individual interests
with collective rights – hence Ella Baker’s “group-centered leaders” instead of
“leader-centered groups.” Further, developing an ideology is important for
sustaining a mass movement, but this ideology has to come from the ground up,
not from the top down. Hence, SNCC lost
its constituency when it moved away from localized social and economic programs
and toward flashy Black Power rhetoric.
And finally, Carson argues that radical separatism will not achieve
social equality as well as interracial cooperation or cooperation with more
liberal groups, both because it overemphasizes individualism and because it has
little basis in the material reality of most potential constituents. Carson’s history thus makes a compelling
argument for grassroots activism and a federated structure as two
characteristics of a successful social change organization.
Showing posts with label Black Power. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Black Power. Show all posts
Friday, April 5, 2013
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
24: Laura Pulido's Black, Brown, Yellow and Left
Laura Pulido squeezes several agendas into this book. As an LA activist who worked with an antiracist, anticapitalist group called the Labor/Community Strategy Center to organize a multiethnic left, she is interested in learning from the history and mechanics of previous multi-racial organizing attempts; she is also interested in fostering a class-based leftist politics among her readers. As a scholar, she is fascinated by the sixties and frustrated that histories of radicalism in that period are either mostly white or centered around the Black Panther Party, so she wants to expand the history of racial/ethnic activism to incorporate more of LA's racial and ethnic groups; and she wants to complicate racism by breaking down the black white binary and investigating racial hierarchies and collaborations (or not) in the people she is studying.
Therefore, Black, Brown, Yellow and Left is part history of the Third World Left, part empirical study of what she calls "differential racism," and part analysis of the growth, development, and decline of a social movement. Pulido accomplishes all of these goals via a comparative analysis of left-leaning activism among three racial/ethnic groups in LA in the late 1960s and early 1970s, using three organizations as stand-ins: the Black Panther Party for African Americans; East Wind, a Japanese American group, for Asian Americans; and CASA, a Chicano/a group, for Latino/as.Although the details of each case make for good reading, her historical conclusions about the relationship between race/ethnicity, racism, and Left activism reveal the complexities of the Third World Left. Her study of the Black Panther Party suggests that their two main concerns of self-defense and community service were directly related to African American racialization (as the 'Other' to whites, they were at the very bottom of the racial hierarchy and over-policed) and their class position as urban poor. CASA, by contrast, focused on labor organizing and immigration issues reflected Chicano/as position as a 'problem minority': their racial status and particular historical experiences as immigrants and low-wage workers meant that they were a needed part of the economy, but only as subordinated and exploited workers. And as a Japanese American group in a multiethnic, multi-class Asian American community, East Wind focused on issues of identity, community service, and solidarity work; their activities reflected their mixed economic position and their status as a 'middle minority.'
Though Pulido found enough connections among groups to indicate a relatively coherent Third World Left, she quickly discovered that these connections were rather thin. All three organizations were interested in the connection between their own identity as a racial or ethnic 'nation' and anticolonial struggles worldwide, and all three were fighting racism and economic exploitation at home, but they were unsure how to work with other communities in LA. This uncertainty had a lot to do with the complex racial hierarchies in LA at the time: African Americans, for instance, were at the bottom of the social hierarchy, but through the millitancy and visibility of the Black Panther Party they were at the top of the social movement hierarchy. Uncertain positioning, as well as uncertainty regarding the status of one's own group, made lasting coalitions difficult.
Pulido argues that despite a strong need for a multiethnic left today, the situation is much the same as it was in the 1960s and 1970s: strong ethnic groups with weak connections among them, and a weak Third World Left as a result. Despite some issues with scope (using a single organization to stand in for all ethnic/racial organizing, for instance), Pulido's book provides a thoughtful analysis of the intersections between race and class in LA that may well be a useful guidebook for folks trying to build political capital today.
Monday, July 2, 2012
Hasan Kwame Jeffries - Bloody Lowndes
Jeffries’ Bloody Lowndes, which both chronicles and contextualizes the
Lowndes County freedom struggle of the late 1960s, uses a combination of
interviews, archival sources, periodicals and histories to argue – against the
canonical view that black militancy destroyed the civil rights movement – that
black militancy and separatist ideology, at least in Lowndes County, was a
necessary ingredient for the success of the freedom rights (vs. voting rights)
struggle. Although he argues that his
thesis holds for the Black Civil Rights struggle as a whole, he centers it around
a painstakingly constructed microhistory of Lowndes County, beginning with
post-Civil War separatist efforts to build black churches, landholding
collectives, and schools; moving through the “Lowndes Diaspora” and the formation of a strong,
geographically diverse social network (whose Detroit arm provided critical
fundraising for the LCFO and other local organizations); detailing the
interconnections between this local network and SNCC’s unique combination of
intensive local activism and political and media know-how; and tracing the
eventual corruption and failure of the movement to the departure of SNCC and
the integration of its main activists into the local political machine. Bloody
Lowndes shows how the development of Lowndes County’s black community into
a strong, grassroots network, in combination with the organizing skills of
experienced activists from SNCC, constituted the seeds for a radical democratic
revolution.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

